Author Topic: Redbridge 33J using route restricted to certain vehicles  (Read 221 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Hippocrates

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 735
  • Karma: +10/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: The Cosmos.
    • View Profile
Re: Redbridge 33J using route restricted to certain vehicles
« Reply #15 on: February 11, 2024, 07:31:43 pm »
I trust you kept a record.
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.

"Hippocrates"

samislango

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Redbridge 33J using route restricted to certain vehicles
« Reply #16 on: February 11, 2024, 08:04:06 pm »
They sent an email acknowledging receipt of the appeal.

Incandescent

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1059
  • Karma: +27/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: Crewe
    • View Profile
Re: Redbridge 33J using route restricted to certain vehicles
« Reply #17 on: February 11, 2024, 11:45:12 pm »
They sent an email acknowledging receipt of the appeal.
Don't lose that email.  Remember the Post Office Horizon syndrome is rife everywhere in public bodies.

samislango

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Redbridge 33J using route restricted to certain vehicles
« Reply #18 on: February 11, 2024, 11:55:16 pm »
Good thinking. I've taken a screen shot of the email as well as a picture of the webpage showing the appeal has been successfully lodged.
Like Like x 1 View List

cp8759

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3073
  • Karma: +78/-3
    • View Profile
Re: Redbridge 33J using route restricted to certain vehicles
« Reply #19 on: February 13, 2024, 12:15:35 am »
It's visible on the cctv pictures provided. It's the first picture in my album with the red circle.
No, that's the back of the sign. We don't know what the front looks like.
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

samislango

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Redbridge 33J using route restricted to certain vehicles
« Reply #20 on: February 18, 2024, 03:10:00 pm »


I've just been down there, this is the view of the sign as you drive towards it.

https://ibb.co/YTP10yj
« Last Edit: February 18, 2024, 03:23:03 pm by samislango »

Hippocrates

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 735
  • Karma: +10/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: The Cosmos.
    • View Profile
Re: Redbridge 33J using route restricted to certain vehicles
« Reply #21 on: February 18, 2024, 03:15:45 pm »
Their response will make fascinating reading. If anyone has a direct e mail address for them I would be most grateful as they have served a premature Charge Certificate in this other case and I have taken them to task over it via the Tribunal:

https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/performing-a-prohibted-turn-redbridge-ilford-high-rd/msg14643/#msg14643
« Last Edit: February 18, 2024, 03:18:51 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.

"Hippocrates"

samislango

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Redbridge 33J using route restricted to certain vehicles
« Reply #22 on: February 18, 2024, 03:27:54 pm »
This is the only email address I could see when I was looking.

If you wish to make a representation on a parking penalty notice, please visit our parking PCN page instead. If you have received an FPN from LA Support please email redbridge.council@lasupport.co.ukto make your representation.

Hippocrates

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 735
  • Karma: +10/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: The Cosmos.
    • View Profile
Re: Redbridge 33J using route restricted to certain vehicles
« Reply #23 on: February 18, 2024, 03:42:21 pm »
Trawled through my emails:  parkingandtrafficenforcement@redbridge.gov.uk

Thanks.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2024, 03:45:42 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.

"Hippocrates"

samislango

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Redbridge 33J using route restricted to certain vehicles
« Reply #24 on: February 20, 2024, 02:38:15 pm »
The rejection letter arrived today.

https://ibb.co/hDmtMs0

Hippocrates

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 735
  • Karma: +10/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: The Cosmos.
    • View Profile
Re: Redbridge 33J using route restricted to certain vehicles
« Reply #25 on: February 20, 2024, 03:07:28 pm »
They have not considered 2 and 3 of your representations.
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.

"Hippocrates"

taffer87

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 58
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Redbridge 33J using route restricted to certain vehicles
« Reply #26 on: February 20, 2024, 03:34:44 pm »
They have not considered 2 and 3 of your representations.

a bit tricky right - as they do have a catch-all generic sentence in the first para? Is not responding in the rejection letter separately a PI?

Incandescent

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1059
  • Karma: +27/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: Crewe
    • View Profile
Re: Redbridge 33J using route restricted to certain vehicles
« Reply #27 on: February 20, 2024, 03:41:13 pm »
Except, of course, the catch-all sentence is a load of lies and always has been. Adjudicators are starting to pick up on this but it's a real struggle.

Hippocrates

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 735
  • Karma: +10/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: The Cosmos.
    • View Profile
Re: Redbridge 33J using route restricted to certain vehicles
« Reply #28 on: February 20, 2024, 04:04:39 pm »
This should have been won on the camera issues at the time; but, we threw everything at it.

In the OP's case they have failed to consider 50%.

*****************

Case Details
Case reference 2230075597
Appellant
Authority London Borough of Lambeth
VRM
PCN Details
PCN
Contravention date 02 Oct 2022
Contravention time 11:21:00
Contravention location Kennington Road
Penalty amount GBP 130.00
Contravention Being in a bus lane
Referral date
Decision Date 23 Feb 2023
Adjudicator Gerald Styles
Appeal decision Appeal allowed
Direction cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and the Enforcement Notice.
Reasons
The hearing appointed for 23 February was in a sense "hybrid" as the Council's representative Mr Charles presented the Council case by telephone on speaker whereas Mr  the appellant accompanied by his representative Mr Morgan were face to face with the Adjudicator.
The appellant representations against the enforcement notice were handwritten and in substance read "You have failed to engage the substance of my initial challenge. The camera has been ruled upon by Mr Carl Teper to have no Home Office Type Approval and costs have been awarded. Evidence is inadmissible please do not waste mine and your time or that of a Tribunal. The PM has been clear a fine should not be issued for instances of bus lane on first time. Your signage was unclear and the rules only recently changed for motorbikes. This was unclear. Mr Stanton Dunne's decision in Davy Duthiew v. London Borough of Ealing No 2220486482 corroborates all previous decisions made by several senior adjudicators concerning the issue of Home Office Type Approval."

Mr  addressed me during the hearing regarding the adequacy of the Council's response to those representations that is to say its notice of rejection dated 29 December 2022. In my view that notice of rejection fairly summarised information relevant to signage. Importantly in my view in respect of admissibility and approval of equipment it however effectively said nothing.

Mr Charles correctly pointed out the letter began by stating "We have carefully considered what you say but have decided not cancel your Penalty Charge Notice". There is also a passage in the notice of rejection about the motorist's comments being noted but not warranting cancellation. "Umbrella" phrases, stock phrase examples, do not necessarily invalidate a notice of rejection but there is a need for something else as well to show particular representations have actually been considered, not just repetition of stock phrases.

Adjudicators in this tribunal frequently and correctly comment that notices of rejection need not cover each and every point made in representations. What is required is something showing that at least major representations amongst what a motorist has written have been duly considered. Length in dealing with major aspects of representations may not be required. Sufficiency in this context is generally viewed by Adjudicators as a matter of fact and degree.

The notice of rejection in this case is in my decision so incomplete a response to readily identified major issues raised that it does not illustrate or correspond in a demonstrable way with the Council's legal duty to consider representations received.

I have decided to allow the appeal on that sole point.

I am making no findings in relation to primary facts in this case or for that matter ruling on equipment used by the Council in connection with it.

Authority Response
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.

"Hippocrates"

Hippocrates

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 735
  • Karma: +10/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: The Cosmos.
    • View Profile
Re: Redbridge 33J using route restricted to certain vehicles
« Reply #29 on: February 20, 2024, 04:11:11 pm »
They have not considered 2 and 3 of your representations.

a bit tricky right - as they do have a catch-all generic sentence in the first para? Is not responding in the rejection letter separately a PI?
PI does not exist. In this legislation we rather use "collateral challenge".  Personally, I dispense with this legalese stuff in the main.  Either the PCN is enforceable or not.  Similarly, either their NOR satisfies the criteria of the law or not. IMO, this one does not.
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.

"Hippocrates"
Agree Agree x 1 View List