Author Topic: Kingston Upon Thames PCN 47j Stopped on a restricted bus stop Location – Clarence Street  (Read 2505 times)

0 Members and 89 Guests are viewing this topic.

Hi Hippocrates,

I have received a reply today in the post rejecting the representation, please see below and let me know what you think!

Regards

Paul

https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/PRwAtoh_md.jpg
https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/0Bpl1U2_xl.jpg
https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/sO58mCQ_xl.jpg
https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/4uxVq9A_xl.jpg
https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/ZQDDlBR_xl.jpg



They have not considered the certificate  issue. I'll balance the issues. I lost a case the other day (may ask for a review) in which the council provided a valid certificate but not a witness statement. This is different and you had raised the issue. There is always the grounds issue too. Life is getting tougher at the moment with some adjudicators.
I REGRET THAT, FOR THE PRESENT, I AM UNABLE TO TAKE ON ANY MORE CASES AS A REPRESENTATIVE AT THE LONDON TRIBUNALS. THIS IS FOR BOTH PERSONAL AND LEGAL REASONS. PLEASE DO NOT PM ME UNLESS YOU HAVE POSTED YOUR THREAD ON THE FORUM AND I WILL ATTEMPT TO GIVE ADVICE.


If you do not challenge, you join "The Mugged Club".

cp8759 and mrmustard are true geniuses. I know my place in the hierarchy of The Three Musketeers. 😊 "The Clinician", "The Gentleman" and "The Showman"

There are "known knowns" which we may never have wished to know. This applies to them. But in the field the idea that there are also "unknown unknowns" doesn't apply as they hide in the aleatoric lottery. I know this is true and need to be prepared knowing the "unknown unknowns" may well apply.

To Socrates from "Hippocrates"

Thanks Hippocrates.

They did ignore the cctv proof request and made no comment on the single sign and lack of visibility at night.
I also notice that they replied stating a "moving" traffic violation. Is this correct?

Do I presume the signage they have is correct and lawful?

Regards

Paul

https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/stopping-at-bus-stop-pcn-victoria-road-surbiton/msg56673/#msg56673

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1qexr8OS0A75Tlc1XX_Oz_4UdhyYJQjLB/view

The reference to a moving traffic contravention is, of course, a blunder but not probably enough to convince an adjudicator to allow the appeal.

The strongest points are the failure to consider the camera issue and not provide proof of such. The "unable to cancel" could be argued to fetter their discretion. And, the inadequate grounds issue on the website.

If you want to meet up, I am speaking at this meeting re the infamous Kingston Road box junction this coming Thursday. The Press will be there.

https://www.ftla.uk/news-press-articles/that-kingston-box-junction/msg105997/#msg105997
« Last Edit: January 18, 2026, 11:24:38 am by Hippocrates »
I REGRET THAT, FOR THE PRESENT, I AM UNABLE TO TAKE ON ANY MORE CASES AS A REPRESENTATIVE AT THE LONDON TRIBUNALS. THIS IS FOR BOTH PERSONAL AND LEGAL REASONS. PLEASE DO NOT PM ME UNLESS YOU HAVE POSTED YOUR THREAD ON THE FORUM AND I WILL ATTEMPT TO GIVE ADVICE.


If you do not challenge, you join "The Mugged Club".

cp8759 and mrmustard are true geniuses. I know my place in the hierarchy of The Three Musketeers. 😊 "The Clinician", "The Gentleman" and "The Showman"

There are "known knowns" which we may never have wished to know. This applies to them. But in the field the idea that there are also "unknown unknowns" doesn't apply as they hide in the aleatoric lottery. I know this is true and need to be prepared knowing the "unknown unknowns" may well apply.

To Socrates from "Hippocrates"

Hi All,

I have decided to appeal to London tribunals and also asked RBK for the 2nd time to strict proof that the camera has a valid certificate.
They have replied in writing and simply said "please note that the CCTV cameras are installed and operated by council and therefore certified".

Now that my appeal date is set, they have since provided the evidence of said camera to the tribunal!
If they had provided this to me in the first instance I may well have decided not to appeal!

Am I likely to get any recognition of this from the appeal tribunal? As my appeal grounds are now very thin.
I could do with some help in drafting my appeal in light of the above information.

https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/NukiCFe_md.png
« Last Edit: February 11, 2026, 03:59:32 pm by Pauldon3576 »

I'm afraid this is how they ruthlessly game the system. However worth mentioning to the adjudicator.

Hi All,

I could do with some help in drafting my appeal comments in light of the above information!

With RBK referring just back to the 2004 act, does that mean that all of my other queries about correct sign, visible signs and length of bus stop are not valid? Or just being ignored.

Regards

P

E mail me.
I REGRET THAT, FOR THE PRESENT, I AM UNABLE TO TAKE ON ANY MORE CASES AS A REPRESENTATIVE AT THE LONDON TRIBUNALS. THIS IS FOR BOTH PERSONAL AND LEGAL REASONS. PLEASE DO NOT PM ME UNLESS YOU HAVE POSTED YOUR THREAD ON THE FORUM AND I WILL ATTEMPT TO GIVE ADVICE.


If you do not challenge, you join "The Mugged Club".

cp8759 and mrmustard are true geniuses. I know my place in the hierarchy of The Three Musketeers. 😊 "The Clinician", "The Gentleman" and "The Showman"

There are "known knowns" which we may never have wished to know. This applies to them. But in the field the idea that there are also "unknown unknowns" doesn't apply as they hide in the aleatoric lottery. I know this is true and need to be prepared knowing the "unknown unknowns" may well apply.

To Socrates from "Hippocrates"