Author Topic: Kingston Upon Thames PCN 47j Stopped on a restricted bus stop Location – Clarence Street  (Read 2744 times)

0 Members and 4 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"

Hi All,

The appeal has been successful!

A big thank you to Hippocrates for his solid steer in the right direction with regard to signage and all advice.
Your time was very much appreciated, as I was apprehensive about challenging this PCN.
A big thumbs up to all at FTLA who assist and contribute.

Factors regarding the bus stop position after a sharp bend, the length of bay, inadequate signage, pedestrians in play and lighting were all acknowledged.

Ultimately the signage and markings in place were not substantially compliant, clear and adequate for the site.

And despite 2 requests for them to supply the information, RBK deliberately did not send me the camera evidence
(which they did indeed have and subsequently provided to the tribunal). I voiced strong views about this behaviour.

Regards

P



Winner Winner x 1 View List

Brilliant  and you had one of the best adjudicators too. 2260070912.

Did they provide a witness statement?
« Last Edit: Today at 04:17:22 pm 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"

I practice law in the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, London Tribunals, the First-tier tribunal for Scotland, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for Northern Ireland, but I am not a solicitor or a barrister. Notwithstanding this, I voluntarily apply the cab rank rule. I am a member of the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends, my membership number is FM193 and I abide by the SPMF service standards.

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

Hi All,

No witness statement from RBK, but I did attend over the phone.

Many Thanks

P

Hi All,

No witness statement from RBK, but I did attend over the phone.

Many Thanks

P

What I meant was: a Witness Statement pertaining to the camera! Could you send me the verification code please? As this will be very useful to see exactly what play they did write.
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"

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

I would have been available on the day but was on taxi duties. I would have argued that, as they did not address the issue in the NOR which, after all, is the very important document which determines whether one is going to appeal or not, is somewhat disingenuous and clearly prejudicial to my case.

I won an appeal with the greatly missed John Lane some years ago where the council adduced an undated image in the NOR and then a more contemporaneous one in their pack. He noted this point in his decision. What a great guy. So personable. After the cases we would talk about Frank Sinatra.
« Last Edit: Today at 07:36:07 pm 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"