3. Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention  (Read 784 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

H C Andersen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2045
  • Karma: +44/-31
    • View Profile
Re: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« Reply #15 on: February 12, 2024, 08:43:52 am »
IMO, you travelling this road regularly and the council knowing the road = both you and they are starting from the wrong point as regards the adjudicator because they don't know 'Valley Road(North)' from a hole in the head!

I suggest that you set a clear and concise context.

On *** my car was recorded as heading ***(N/S/E/W) in Valley Road between *** and ****(names of roads). I can see that based solely upon the council's CCTV and photos the presence of 'motor vehicles prohibited' signs which give effect to traffic travelling in the opposite direction it would appear that my car was in a length of road where it should not have been.

I entered this length of road by (turning left/right/going straight on) at its junction with ***(road(s)). I did not see any prohibition signs in my direction and I dispute that such signs were in situ.

Would this capture the essence for the adjudicator and allow your evidence to continue with your photos etc?
Logged

MissO

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« Reply #16 on: February 12, 2024, 08:54:32 am »
Yes as you stated I have to rightly assume the adjudicator has no knowledge of Valley road and this is a good start to paint the picture. I’ll add some extras I believe are relevant too

Thanks once again
Logged

John U.K.

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1117
  • Karma: +21/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« Reply #17 on: February 12, 2024, 09:38:12 am »
Quote
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!!

Evidence that the Council itself considered the signage inadequate.
Logged

cp8759

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5303
  • Karma: +123/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« Reply #18 on: February 12, 2024, 09:39:18 am »
Do not send anything yet, and don't worry about the silly 3 day thing, that's just a templated letter. In practice if you get the evidence that late you'll just call the tribunal and postpone the hearing. As an appellant you get up to two hearings with no questions asked, as long as you call the tribunal before the day of the hearing, and you can use each reschedule to postpone the case by up to 28 days.

Take full advantage of that and do not do anything until you have the council evidence, and once you have it do not let the council rush you either.
Logged
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 nor 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.

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

Hippocrates

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2290
  • Karma: +26/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: The Cosmos.
    • View Profile
Re: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« Reply #19 on: February 12, 2024, 12:43:42 pm »
Quote from: John U.K. on February 12, 2024, 09:38:12 am
Quote
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!!

Evidence that the Council itself considered the signage inadequate.
I would make an immediate FOIR to ascertain when the job number was created and when the works were completed - and why???

I think I am doing this case as I am there anyway.  I am!
« Last Edit: February 12, 2024, 10:32:51 pm by Hippocrates »
Logged
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.
"Hippocrates"

ἔοικα γοῦν τούτου γε σμικρῷ τινι αὐτῷ τούτῳ σοφώτερος εἶναι, ὅτι ἃ μὴ οἶδα οὐδὲ οἴομαι ε

Hippocrates

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2290
  • Karma: +26/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: The Cosmos.
    • View Profile
Re: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« Reply #20 on: February 13, 2024, 10:44:48 am »
FOIR sent. My gut feeling is to ask for an adjournment pending their reply.
Logged
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.
"Hippocrates"

ἔοικα γοῦν τούτου γε σμικρῷ τινι αὐτῷ τούτῳ σοφώτερος εἶναι, ὅτι ἃ μὴ οἶδα οὐδὲ οἴομαι ε

cp8759

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5303
  • Karma: +123/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« Reply #21 on: February 18, 2024, 11:15:40 pm »
Quote from: Hippocrates on February 13, 2024, 10:44:48 am
FOIR sent. My gut feeling is to ask for an adjournment pending their reply.
I wouldn't waste an adjournment until we know they're going to contest.
Logged
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 nor 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.

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

Hippocrates

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2290
  • Karma: +26/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: The Cosmos.
    • View Profile
Re: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« Reply #22 on: February 19, 2024, 12:31:06 pm »
Quote from: cp8759 on February 18, 2024, 11:15:40 pm
Quote from: Hippocrates on February 13, 2024, 10:44:48 am
FOIR sent. My gut feeling is to ask for an adjournment pending their reply.
I wouldn't waste an adjournment until we know they're going to contest.

They are.  Saw the file a week ago.
Logged
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.
"Hippocrates"

ἔοικα γοῦν τούτου γε σμικρῷ τινι αὐτῷ τούτῳ σοφώτερος εἶναι, ὅτι ἃ μὴ οἶδα οὐδὲ οἴομαι ε
Like Like x 1 View List

Hippocrates

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2290
  • Karma: +26/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: The Cosmos.
    • View Profile
Re: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« Reply #23 on: March 25, 2024, 06:47:10 pm »
Won:  no correlation of photos with warning signage.

Not by the way, it was an absolute pleasure to meet the OP and her little one! The latter at one time was gripping one of my fingers while I was talking to the adjudicator.  ;D  This case is a testament to the absolute necessity to turn up in person. The adjudicator who heard the appeal is one of the best in my view.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2024, 09:55:22 pm by Hippocrates »
Logged
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.
"Hippocrates"

ἔοικα γοῦν τούτου γε σμικρῷ τινι αὐτῷ τούτῳ σοφώτερος εἶναι, ὅτι ἃ μὴ οἶδα οὐδὲ οἴομαι ε
Love Love x 1 View List

MissO

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« Reply #24 on: March 25, 2024, 10:43:27 pm »
@Hippocrates

You beat me to it!! Yes we WON!!

Points that were considered;

- Council Evidence provided did not show the sign was present when I entered the road. Camera captured front of the car and not from the back, as it enter the road. This would have also shown the signs at the entrance of the road if they did!

- they provided a whole load of pics that had no correlation to where the contravention apparently happened. They added pictures of signage along the length of the road, which were random, as we couldn’t be sure they were in fact from the named Valley Road, as they showed no road names!

- witness statement helped stating passenger also, did not see any signs alerting motorists of no entry.

- the additional evidence I obtained also helped as it showed where the signage “should” have been present but wasn’t. Instead, there were washed up posters attached to the lamppost.

Can’t thank you enough honestly and everyone who gave advice here also!
Logged

Hippocrates

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2290
  • Karma: +26/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: The Cosmos.
    • View Profile
Re: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« Reply #25 on: March 27, 2024, 06:47:28 am »
The issue was the adequacy of the signage.

The appellant provided what she asserted was the reverse side of the signage in question, that is the signage that was facing her. The signs were blank. The signage that was facing her vehicle could not be seen in the video footage.

The local authority’s photographic evidence, I find to be unsatisfactory. There is no photographic evidence of a right-turn warning sign as depicted on the diagram provided by the authority. The other photographic evidence provided by the authority is left to conjecture; there are no road descriptions. The appellant asserted that it was not the signage at the scene.

On balance, I prefer the appellant’s evidence and will allow the appeal.
Logged
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.
"Hippocrates"

ἔοικα γοῦν τούτου γε σμικρῷ τινι αὐτῷ τούτῳ σοφώτερος εἶναι, ὅτι ἃ μὴ οἶδα οὐδὲ οἴομαι ε

Hippocrates

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2290
  • Karma: +26/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: The Cosmos.
    • View Profile
Re: Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention
« Reply #26 on: March 27, 2024, 07:20:09 am »
Quote from: Hippocrates on February 13, 2024, 10:44:48 am
FOIR sent. My gut feeling is to ask for an adjournment pending their reply.
Still not received.  Deadline  was last Wednesday.  ::)
Logged
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.
"Hippocrates"

ἔοικα γοῦν τούτου γε σμικρῷ τινι αὐτῷ τούτῳ σοφώτερος εἶναι, ὅτι ἃ μὴ οἶδα οὐδὲ οἴομαι ε
Pages: 1 [2]
« previous next »
  3. Rejected appeal by Lambeth 52m contravention