Author Topic: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention  (Read 221 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

MissO

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« on: February 06, 2024, 02:42:28 am »
Hello All, Iím new here and hope Iíve followed all the rules, so here goes.. I got a PCN from Lambeth stating contravention code 52m (will attach evidence so Iím not typing it all). I appealed based on the evidence provided shows my car facing the same direction as the sign meant to warn me of possible contravention (please see annotated pic too with red arrows lol). This is a road I travel all the time but they have recently changed entry rules. On the said day, there was no sign warning me not to enter the road, neither have Lambeth provided evidence of a sign being there. I now have a tribunal case in March! Do I have a case to defend or should I count my pennies and pay the fine?

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter


Hippocrates

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 735
  • Karma: +10/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: The Cosmos.
    • View Profile
Re: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« Reply #1 on: February 06, 2024, 10:27:41 am »
If you have registered the appeal at the Tribunal, you certainly do not pay it now!

We need:

1. The whole PCN

2. The whole 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"

MissO

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« Reply #2 on: February 06, 2024, 11:00:39 am »
Hello

Thank you so much for your reply,

Hopefully the link below will show all the required documents if not please do let me know,
Really appreciate

https://photos.app.goo.gl/2qa8MzbyXJqxBFSQ6

Hippocrates

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 735
  • Karma: +10/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: The Cosmos.
    • View Profile
Re: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« Reply #3 on: February 06, 2024, 12:24:16 pm »
PCN?  Does it state what vehicles?  Need to see it.
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"

MissO

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« Reply #4 on: February 06, 2024, 01:20:34 pm »
Hello,

It stated Motor Vehicles

Iíve attached it again here, I hope this is a better quality to see, many thanks

MissO

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« Reply #5 on: February 06, 2024, 01:28:56 pm »
Found the original too. Iím so grateful for all the replies, Iím going to try head out today to get some pics but Iím sure they would have rectified the signage by now! Should they not provide evidence that the signage was in place on the said day, instead of just ďsayingĒ it was there?

Incandescent

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1059
  • Karma: +27/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: Crewe
    • View Profile
Re: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« Reply #6 on: February 06, 2024, 02:46:25 pm »
The civil law test applied by adjudicators is "on the balance of probabilities". However, if the council provide no proof of the presence of the sign in their evidence, then you should win, but library photos plus a witness statement can be acceptable.

Hippocrates

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 735
  • Karma: +10/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: The Cosmos.
    • View Profile
Re: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« Reply #7 on: February 06, 2024, 03:09:32 pm »
The civil law test applied by adjudicators is "on the balance of probabilities". However, if the council provide no proof of the presence of the sign in their evidence, then you should win, but library photos plus a witness statement can be acceptable.
Provided that the photos of the signs are not that dated (old) or undated.
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"

Incandescent

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1059
  • Karma: +27/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: Crewe
    • View Profile
Re: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« Reply #8 on: February 06, 2024, 11:13:30 pm »
The civil law test applied by adjudicators is "on the balance of probabilities". However, if the council provide no proof of the presence of the sign in their evidence, then you should win, but library photos plus a witness statement can be acceptable.
Provided that the photos of the signs are not that dated (old) or undated.
Good point.

MissO

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« Reply #9 on: February 07, 2024, 01:02:29 am »
Soooo from your advice I took a quick spin there this afternoon and obviously the signs are now updated. However thereís an A4 sheet of paper on a lamppost dated 19/01/24 informing of the amendment coming into force from 24th Jan 2024. I then went online to Lambeth website and the previous (the first update informing motor vehicles will not be able to enter the road) is not there?

Google link with all the pictures taken today

https://photos.app.goo.gl/zRwQpC6PFF8yjLXM7

As already mentioned too, why did the council not submit evidence of my car passing a driver facing sign as I allegedly entered a prohibited road?

If there was any sign there on the day I travelled, it might have been those washed out a4 sheets of paper - how is this a proper sign for a motorist to see?

Thankfully I wasnít riding alone and can get a witness statement.

Since itís now at tribunal stage, theyíve said the full £130 is payable, thereís no harm in trying to defend my case with everything I can

Thank you to everyone

Incandescent

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1059
  • Karma: +27/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: Crewe
    • View Profile
Re: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« Reply #10 on: February 07, 2024, 01:18:17 am »
Keep those photos for use with your appeal at London Tribunals.

MissO

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« Reply #11 on: February 07, 2024, 01:24:58 am »
Will do, thank you so much.  Whatever the outcome I will come back here to share, if thereís anything said that can help anyone else in the future!
Ps forgot to add the screenshot from the Lambeth website where the notice should have been listed but isnít there

cp8759

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3073
  • Karma: +78/-3
    • View Profile
Re: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« Reply #12 on: February 11, 2024, 01:13:58 pm »
@MissO have you requested a hearing? If not, call the tribunal call centre now and ask them to change the hearing from postal to either personal or telephone.

Also have you received the council evidence pack?

And can you please show us your representations to the council, and the appeal you sent to the tribunal?
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: 735
  • Karma: +10/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: The Cosmos.
    • View Profile
Re: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« Reply #13 on: February 11, 2024, 02:15:42 pm »
I think there is a hearing on one of the days Mr Schofeldt is there.  ;)  March.

Getting confused with my MI6 identities but PM sent on this forum. ;D
« Last Edit: February 11, 2024, 03:12:11 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"

MissO

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« Reply #14 on: February 12, 2024, 05:19:21 am »
@cp8759

Yes my hearing is face to face, thank you so much.

Iím still waiting on the council pack however it states they can send it up until 3 days before the date.

Funny enough I passed Valley Road yesterday and if you see the pretty signs that have now been put up, good job I had gone before as the evidence looks very different!!

I havenít sent my rep for the appeal yet, Iím hoping to get that done by today or tomorrow.

I will search to see if I can get my written statement somehow. However in all honesty, my only claim was that the camera was facing the opposite direction and they didnít provide evidence that I had seen the sign on entering the road, as that too was facing the same direction I was driving in.

Iíve attached my unprofessional annotated picture I sent back to them. From the advice here I wish I had done better leg work before I sent the appeal in