ICO Decision Notice (https://ico.org.uk/media/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/2024/4028108/ic-258168-c5n2.pdf).
Does this set a precedent?
Case number?All their paperwork now fixed.
ICO Decision Notice (https://ico.org.uk/media/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/2024/4028108/ic-258168-c5n2.pdf).Another possible avenue to contact the auditors?
ICO Decision Notice (https://ico.org.uk/media/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/2024/4028108/ic-258168-c5n2.pdf).[/i]
Case number?
Good luck with your costs application.
Mr Harman allowed costs in a Kingston case in January but not to the representative. Fair enough.As above, the representative's costs are only recoverable if the appellant pays for them. Where an appellant has paid for my train tickets to attend the tribunal in person and a costs award has been made, the tribunal has always allowed the appellant to recover those costs from the authority.
I can't find it offhand but there is a tribunal decision by Mr Chan that the costs of a representative are not the costs of the AppellantFor reps costs to be recoverable, you have to charge the client so that they become the client's costs. One solution is to agree a fee with the client on the understanding that if costs are not recovered from the opponent, the agreement won't be enforced, @Nosy Parker does this.
Good luck with your costs application.Agreed.
I can't find it offhand but there is a tribunal decision by Mr Chan that the costs of a representative are not the costs of the Appellant (especially as I work pro bono - for free) and given that 95% of the time spent is by the representative I no longer regard it as worthwhile to make costs applications. The Appeal was only 127 words which did not take long to formulate so any claim would be a minimal amount. The main cost comes from considering the evidence pack, writing the skeleton argument and attending the tribunal in person, none of which happened.
To bring everyone up to date.
Havering rejected the representations on 26 October but didn't bother to mention them in the rejection, just that the vehicle was in the bus lane.
I started an Appeal on 3 November on the basis that the Notice of Rejection was inadequate and unlawful + the representations themselves were still live.
Yesterday, Havering decided to 'Do not contest' the Appeal.
Hurrah.
We seem to have screenshots of the pages rather than just the images themselves, makes them smaller than would be ideal.
However, the front page is perfectly clear and it contains a fatal error.
It says that payment must be made 'not later that the last day of the period fo 28 days beginning with the date of this Enforcement Notice'.
The law, the London Local Authorities Act 1996 sets the time limit as being 28 days from service of the Enforcement Notice (in para 1(2)(c) of Schedule 1).
Probably best let me represent you (free of charge) maisiethecat. If you want that please send me a complete copy of the Enforcement Notice by email to mrmustard@zoho.com
I just see one page.
OK thankyou, i need to google, is there a time period that happens, and i guess once that is issued by the parking/council then the full amount is payable?There's a six-month cut off, but it's unlikely they'll wait that long.
There is no second page of the rejection letter, im not sure if there should be but i would think they would sign off the letter wouldn't they.Are you saying the back of the letter is blank?
There is no second page of the rejection letter, im not sure if there should be but i would think they would sign off the letter wouldn't they.
this is the response to the challenge, there was no second page or any details on the back of this one.This is not the response to the challenge. Please read the guidance here (https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/read-this-first-before-posting-your-case!-this-section-is-for-council-tfl-dartme/) on how to post images, imgur is generally best as it had very good integration with the forum.
The registered keeper's(whoever this is) reps have been rejected, it's therefore pay or appeal.Err no, it's not.
'hi all, looking for advice, wife was driving in Rromford,
On the day of the alleged offence 21st April, I was driving towards the A12
The registered keeper's(whoever this is) reps have been rejected, it's therefore pay or appeal.
Absent technicalities, appeal outcomes often hang on credibility based upon first-hand accounts, in this case conditions at the time and the driver's view of events, not a bird's-eye camera.
So let's be clear about who was driving, who is the RK and who, possibly 2 people, would need to present evidence at a hearing.