Author Topic: Harrow Code 33E Route restricted for Buses/Cycles/Taxis - Camrose Avenue (Again!)  (Read 401 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

cp8759

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3521
  • Karma: +87/-3
    • View Profile
Hi @cp8759,

It's in a state of hold
@AceKingPin no it isn't, the appeal deadline is the adjudicator's deadline, it's not the council's deadline and the council can't extend somebody else's deadline. The discount is gone and the appeal period expired a week ago, so I suggest you urgently register an appeal on the tribunal website at https://londontribunals.org.uk/

When the portal asks you why you're appealing late, you'll just have to explain that you were waiting for some further information from the council and you were under the impression the council had put the matter on hold, but you've now received legal advice confirming the council cannot extend the 28 day appeal deadline.

You can just put "I rely on my formal representations" as the reasons for the appeal, when we can wait for the tribunal evidence pack and submit a full argument at a later date.
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law. Section 6 of the Interpretation Act 1978 applies to everything I post as it would apply to an Act of Parliament. I am a Conservative councillor, this means some people think I am "scum". I am not a lawyer.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order

AceKingPin

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 19
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Thanks @cp8759 - the London Tribunals website is asking me for a verification code: "On your Notice of Rejection letter you will find the verification code" - per my screenshots earlier, there isn't one, so what do I do? I can't bypass this screen.

cp8759

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3521
  • Karma: +87/-3
    • View Profile
Thanks @cp8759 - the London Tribunals website is asking me for a verification code: "On your Notice of Rejection letter you will find the verification code" - per my screenshots earlier, there isn't one, so what do I do? I can't bypass this screen.
@AceKingPin with the notice of rejection you should have had a paper appeal form, the verification code is printed on the last page on the right hand side.

If they didn't provide a paper appeal form let me know please.
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law. Section 6 of the Interpretation Act 1978 applies to everything I post as it would apply to an Act of Parliament. I am a Conservative councillor, this means some people think I am "scum". I am not a lawyer.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order

AceKingPin

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 19
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Thanks @cp8759, I found the code in the end, had to rifle through some paperwork - so submitted a very brief appeal (ref 2240148427), stating:

"I was waiting for some further information from the council and I was under the impression the council had put the matter on hold from an email they had sent to me on 12/3/24, stating:

"We are in receipt of your further email and the case is on hold awaiting a response to be issued and sent to you. The Council are currently experiencing a backlog and so you may not receive a response for a further 2-3 weeks. The case will remain on hold until it is dealt with."

I've now received legal advice confirming the council cannot extend the 28 day appeal deadline. I am unable to form the basis of my appeal without the information I requested of the council on 12/3/24, so in lieu of this, I rely on my formal representations."

I'll know the Tribunal decision within 7 days on acceptance (or not) of my appeal.
Like Like x 1 View List

AceKingPin

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 19
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Hello, so the appeal was agreed to be considered by the Adjudicator on 30 April at London Tribunals on Furnival Street. I have the option of requesting a telephone hearing.

Thanks for your advice @cp8759 - so given the appeal is now taking place, I'm questioning:

1. Is it better to opt for a telephone hearing (cost and time of going into London)?
2. Does the council's slow response to my evidence requests count against them?
3. How long is it reasonable / unreasonable for the council to take in duration, before providing me with my original representation text?
4. Do I still have the option of the reduced charge given the delays from the council, in the event my appeal fails?

Many thanks for any help and advice.

cp8759

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3521
  • Karma: +87/-3
    • View Profile
When I'm representing someone I always do so by telephone, it is very rare that a case is complex or important enough to warrant a personal attendance.

The council is not required to provide any evidence at all prior to the tribunal stage.

The council should provide an evidence pack prior to the hearing, but the tribunal will give an appellant up to two reschedules of up to 28 days each, no questions asked. This being the case, if you get the evidence pack from the council less than two weeks prior to the hearing, I'd just call up the tribunal call centre and move the hearing back 3 or 4 weeks, so you don't have to prepare in a massive rush.

The discount is gone, any appeal to the tribunal is against the full penalty. The discount is offered for those who are willing to accept liability and who thus save the council the trouble and expense of having to fight a tribunal appeal, if you could appeal and still pay the discount then everyone would appeal everything regardless of merit.

Do not rely on the post, check the tribunal portal once every few days to see if the council has contested the case. The digital version of the evidence is easier to work with so my advice is that if you get a copy in the post, throw it straight in the bin and download the PDF version from the tribunal website.
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law. Section 6 of the Interpretation Act 1978 applies to everything I post as it would apply to an Act of Parliament. I am a Conservative councillor, this means some people think I am "scum". I am not a lawyer.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order

Hippocrates

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 972
  • Karma: +12/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: The Cosmos.
    • View Profile
+1.  And, if you do ask for a changed date, avoid Thursdays. They should all correspondence in their pack.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2024, 12:39:26 pm by Hippocrates »
There are known knowns which, had we known, we would never have wished to know. It is known that this also applies to the known unknowns. However, when one attends a hearing, Mr Rumsfeld's idea that there are also unknown unknowns fails to apply because, anyone who is in the know, knows that unknown unknowns are purely a deception otherwise known as an aleatory experience or also known as a lottery. I know that I know this to be a fact and, in this knowledge, I know that I am fully prepared to present my case but, paradoxically, in full knowledge that the unknown unknowns may well apply in view of some adjudicators' lack of knowing what they ought to know through no fault of their own.

"Hippocrates"

AceKingPin

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 19
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Thanks for your responses @cp8759 and @Hippocrates.

I'm saddened to hear the discount is gone, as I was told by the council that the 'case was on hold' - does that have no meaning? I've submitted my appeal based on your advice @cp8759 - have I lost my ability to claim a discounted reduction as a result?

I'm surprised it's taken so long for the council to provide me with my original representation text which is something I'd think could be retrieved in minutes rather than the order of a month, hence my question on whether this is unreasonable. I'd think I should be entitled to review all of my information submitted BEFORE I decide to appeal, not after - and I take issue with that.

cp8759

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3521
  • Karma: +87/-3
    • View Profile
Thanks for your responses @cp8759 and @Hippocrates.

I'm saddened to hear the discount is gone, as I was told by the council that the 'case was on hold' - does that have no meaning?

Obviously not, when I looked on the council website this is what appeared:



Did you get anything in writing, or did you just believe what they said on the phone?
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law. Section 6 of the Interpretation Act 1978 applies to everything I post as it would apply to an Act of Parliament. I am a Conservative councillor, this means some people think I am "scum". I am not a lawyer.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order

AceKingPin

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 19
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Hello @cp8759, I received the following in writing:

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

So I genuinely thought the discount would remain active. This response is contrary to the screenshot you've sent, and to me, it seems unfair and that I've been misled in this process.

cp8759

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3521
  • Karma: +87/-3
    • View Profile
OK well if they contest the appeal we could develop the argument.
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law. Section 6 of the Interpretation Act 1978 applies to everything I post as it would apply to an Act of Parliament. I am a Conservative councillor, this means some people think I am "scum". I am not a lawyer.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order

AceKingPin

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 19
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Hello @cp8759, I've just received the evidence pack in which my original challenge text was finally provided to me:

"Q: Please describe why you want to challenge the penalty charge notice
A: The lighting around the area and insufficient illumination of signage in advance of approaching the bus lane are the main reasons.
I was driving the vehicle at a time where street lighting was off, and I veered into the left lane assuming it was the safest lane to travel with and being uncertain whether the right lane represented a fork to force me to turn right. I didn't see adequate signage when approaching the lane (I don't think street lighting and signing was lit) that there was a restriction in that lane. I only realised after I saw the double dashed lines that gave way to the right lane traffic that I may have been in the wrong lane. But further to not seeing any visible signage on my approach, I was not aware that the validity of it extended to after midnight either. I thought it was safer for me to continue to proceed rather than reverse my car and then move to the right lane."

I would like to ask if you would be prepared to represent or assist me in this matter at all? My wife is the registered keeper and I was the driver at the time of the contravention, which has been recorded.

I'm happy to request switching the hearing to a telephone hearing as required, and I would maintain that I should still be allowed the discounted 65 rate given my earlier email submission and the council's failure to provide me with the above evidence text in time.

cp8759

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3521
  • Karma: +87/-3
    • View Profile
I have sent you a PM.
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law. Section 6 of the Interpretation Act 1978 applies to everything I post as it would apply to an Act of Parliament. I am a Conservative councillor, this means some people think I am "scum". I am not a lawyer.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order
Like Like x 1 View List

MMV Redux

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 76
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
I understand that the camera used at this site is VCA/SoS approved for parking contraventions under Art 2 The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (Approved Devices) (England) Order 2007.

I'll leave it to others to determine if this provides wriggle room in a moving traffic case.

Mike

Hippocrates

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 972
  • Karma: +12/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: The Cosmos.
    • View Profile
Unfortunately, it matters not. Petition re homogeneity to follow.  ;D
There are known knowns which, had we known, we would never have wished to know. It is known that this also applies to the known unknowns. However, when one attends a hearing, Mr Rumsfeld's idea that there are also unknown unknowns fails to apply because, anyone who is in the know, knows that unknown unknowns are purely a deception otherwise known as an aleatory experience or also known as a lottery. I know that I know this to be a fact and, in this knowledge, I know that I am fully prepared to present my case but, paradoxically, in full knowledge that the unknown unknowns may well apply in view of some adjudicators' lack of knowing what they ought to know through no fault of their own.

"Hippocrates"