Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: Marisha on October 06, 2024, 09:48:00 am
-
Outcome (https://drive.google.com/file/d/130_IdkC9PAbcDH1nMcy7FOPhVJxYjgFA/view).
-
I will give it some thought particularly as they have changed the signs and DNCed another one which should have been heard yesterday.
2240426745
I was just relieved to win. I will put up all the evidence later.
I did say the threat was "illegal" and an abuse of the statutory process, even though they back-peddled by rescinding it nearer the hearing date.
-
Odd reasoning IMO.
This has nothing to do with the NoR whose contents are prescribed. This relates to:
Charge certificates
5(1)Where a penalty charge notice is served on any person and the penalty charge to which it relates is not paid before the end of the relevant period, the enforcing authority may serve on that person a statement (in this paragraph referred to as a “charge certificate”) to the effect that the penalty charge in question is increased by 50 per cent.
(2)The relevant period, in relation to a penalty charge notice is the period of 28 days beginning—
(a)where no representations are made under paragraph 1 above, with the date on which the penalty charge notice is served;
(b)where such representations are made and a notice of rejection is served by the enforcing authority and no appeal against the notice of rejection is made with the date on which the period within which an appeal could have been made expires;
or
(c)where there has been an unsuccessful appeal against a notice of rejection, with the date on which notice of the adjudicator’s decision is served on the appellant.
IMO, it's not about confusion, it's about legality: subsequent to being notified by the adjudicator that an appeal had been registered, no legal right to issue a CC exists unless para. 5(1)(c) is engaged.
Go for costs and see what happens.
-
;D 2240451990
costs ? Surely the "wholly unreasonable" test is met.
-
;D 2240451990
-
@Marisha I strongly recommend you let Hippocrates sort this out for you. The council rejects everything because if they accept representations they get nothing, if they reject they get to keep all the money from the penalty for themselves.
@cp8759 Thanks. We are in contact. BTW, the other 16 will hopefully be heard on 29th October and all consolidated. Not that I approve, but, no wonder the sign has been vandalised recently!
Filed.
-
@Marisha I strongly recommend you let Hippocrates sort this out for you. The council rejects everything because if they accept representations they get nothing, if they reject they get to keep all the money from the penalty for themselves.
-
@Marisha I am happy to deal with this one for you. I will PM you my details. I need to see all what you wrote and their unredacted Notice of Rejection. I have hearings on the 29th dealing with 16 PCNs. They had decided not to contest the other 6.
-
They refuse all representations, because they know that most people then cough-up, not wanting to risk the extra £65 at London Tribunals. It a nice little earner for them.
-
Hi all
I submitted representation for a PCN I received from Lewisham for contravention of 52 m on Leahurst road - westbound, which was rejected. Based my representation on what I read on this forum and obviously totally agree with the previous posts that signage is inadequate. Seeing that few people appealed successfully, I thought the council would cancel my PCN. Which is unfortunately not the case. I really want to appeal it but not sure if I can just use the same wording from the links posted on the previous posts? Appreciate your advice @cp8759, @Hippocrates
https://imgur.com/a/5BiFjv6