I cannot see much of a reputation here as there was no evidence of the 100's of cases wonEvery noteworthy case is added to the "Key cases" tab of this spreadsheet, most of those cases are ours and most of them have been allowed, we add more each week. With your track record of 2 losses (this case and 2210528586) and zero wins, you're not really in a position to lecture us. In the other case learned adjudicator Teper said:
but lots of very unprofessional replies which do not bode well for forum that should be providing independent advice which should be balanced and objective.Our advice is correct, we're not going to change the advice just because you don't like it.
No chance of that here, totally unprofessional personally attacking anyone who disagrees with your views and including information that is clearly inaccurate in your responses including responses which could amount to breaches of personal data.Firstly you're the one who disagrees with a judicial tribunal, so your starting position is that you're on the back foot. As for the personal data thing, go on, sue me, I dare you.
In the final analysis the adjudicator was not in the car at the time, I was.If this particular adjudicator had been in the car she would have had to recuse herself. At the end of the day she reached a decision that she was entitled to on the basis of the evidence before her, if I'd been the adjudicator I would have made the same decision. We give honest and frank advice, we're not here to tell you what you want to hear.
I have seen the video footage which does not support your position that the car has not turned as it is only the last segment of the video.A mere disagreement with the adjudicator is not a ground for a review.
Please do list the cases you have won and your qualifications. There is are large number of new articles pointing to problems with this location that fact that the council made over £3000,0000 in year shows the problems with the area. The ticket was paid on 07/01/2025 by cheque so you cannot be referring to my ticket. I will not be taking your advice as it does not seem to very good to me and I have no evidence of this long list of cases you have won. I will be raising this with my MP and seeking to make a judicial review application and invite others to provide evidence. As for the tribunal statistics there are clearly biased. The list I saw had less the 0.001 per cent success rate, if you have an alternative list please share it.@sankofa
This isn't about money, the ticket has been paid
The ticket was paid on 07/01/2025 by cheque so you cannot be referring to my ticket.
There is are large number of new articles pointing to problems with this location that fact that the council made over £3000,0000 in year shows the problems with the area.
The list I saw had less the 0.001 per cent success rate, if you have an alternative list please share it.
I will be raising this with my MP
This isn't about money, the ticket has been paid. It's about the council ripping drivers off by poor signposting and the fact that virtually every appeal goes before the traffic tribunal is rejected.I'm not sure that's right, at the moment virtually every Southwark PCN can be beaten. I don't know if it's me you're referring to, obviously I have no formal legal qualifications but as somebody recently asked me I did check my win rate over the past four months at the result came out at a truly ridiculous 96%, I wouldn't be surprised if local authorities complained to the Chief Adjudicator to say that the tribunal is biased in my favour (it isn't, I'm just a more skilled advocate than the councils' appeals officers). There is absolutely no merit whatsoever in the suggestion that the tribunal is biased in any way at all, all adjudicators decide cases based on what they understand to be the correct interpretation of the law and while they are not infallible, they get it right most of the time.
Subject: Appeal Against Adjudicator’s DecisionThe London Tribunals Statutory Register has no record of the above case number, so please check you have it right. What date was the hearing and the location ?
Case Reference: 2240394477
Penalty Charge Notice (PCN): JK04731788