Author Topic: 3IJ -Box Jct New Kings Rd - Entering and stopping In a box Junction when prohibited  (Read 2639 times)

0 Members and 56 Guests are viewing this topic.

Failure to consider. Yor money, of course, but I would take it to the Tribunal. BTW I have 3 of my own live at present.
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"

Failure to consider. Yor money, of course, but I would take it to the Tribunal. BTW I have 3 of my own live at present.

Sorry, i'm not legal, but my layman's brain assumes that i should take this to tribunal based on the grounds they Failure to consider or take into account relevant information or arguments presented to then regarding the procedural error ?

Am i correct in assuming this?

And how do i take it to tribunal? just leave it/ ignore them until i get a court summons? Do i now deliberately not respond to their action within 14/28 days?

Can you please advise in a tad more detail. I'd really appreciate it.
A Lemon Tootski - a term I call for that lovely lemon Fixed Penalty Sticker that appears on your windscreen, after a nice day out with the kids.

A Lemon Tootski: The only souvenir from your family day out that really sticks with you!

I'll PM you tomorrow as very busy with 6 cases on Friday.
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 @Hippocrates / or anyone else.

Sorry to bother you, but I have a payment deadline of Wed 3 Dec.

Just wondering if you have any advice for this one?

thanks
A Lemon Tootski - a term I call for that lovely lemon Fixed Penalty Sticker that appears on your windscreen, after a nice day out with the kids.

A Lemon Tootski: The only souvenir from your family day out that really sticks with you!

Failure to consider is a ground of appeal. You have 28 days from date of service of the NOR to lodge an appeal. 2 working days from the date of the NOR. 19th December.

5th December is deadline to pay discount.
« Last Edit: December 01, 2025, 09:41:52 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"

Cool, you are a Gladiator, @Hippocrates !

So, what do you think of this for an appeal to adjudicators?

I am appealing the Notice of Rejection (NOR) dated 21/11/2025 on the ground that the contravention did not legally occur, because the Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) is invalid due to statutory non-compliance, and the Council failed to properly consider or address my representation points.

1. Failure to Consider (Procedural Impropriety)
The NOR entirely fails to address the specific, legal, collateral challenge I raised in my representation. The NOR simply focused on the factual details of the contravention (stopping in the box junction) and the driver’s responsibility, but did not once mention or provide a finding on my core arguments:

The PCN is non-compliant with the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003 (LLATFLA 2003) regarding mandatory information.

The PCN misstates the legal period for payment running from "date of service" instead of the statutory "date of the notice," which I argued is prejudicial.

The PCN contains contradictory instructions on selecting grounds for representation, leading to procedural unfairness.

The Council’s rejection amounts to a Failure to Consider the material points of my representation, which is a procedural impropriety and a separate ground for appeal that renders the NOR fundamentally flawed.

2. PCN is Invalid Due to Statutory Non-Compliance
My underlying legal challenge remains unrefuted and valid:

Misstatement of Statutory Time Limit: The PCN states the increased charge may be payable 28 days from the "date of service." The governing legislation (LLATFLA 2003 s.4(8)(iii)) stipulates this period runs from the "date of the notice." This misstatement of the legal position is material and prejudicial, as established in numerous previous Adjudicator rulings.

Contradictory Instructions: I argued the PCN contained contradictory instructions regarding representation grounds (stating "one or more" may apply, then directing to "Please tick one of the set grounds"). This ambiguity prevents proper compliance with statutory rights and constitutes a procedural defect that voids the Notice.

Given the Council's complete failure to engage with these material, legal points in their Notice of Rejection, I request that the Adjudicator allow this appeal on the basis of procedural impropriety and the underlying invalidity of the PCN itself.
A Lemon Tootski - a term I call for that lovely lemon Fixed Penalty Sticker that appears on your windscreen, after a nice day out with the kids.

A Lemon Tootski: The only souvenir from your family day out that really sticks with you!

Just this: the council have failed to consider my issues with the invalidity of their PCN which is missing vital mandatory information. I will file full submissions upon receipt of their evidence pack.
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"