Show Posts - Bingbong

Quote from: stamfordman on 02 Oct, 2024 15:07Why have you got a charge certificate? The rejection letter says you had to pay or appeal to the tribunal. If you did neither it looks to me you're stuck with a £165 bill when you could have paid £55.I'm not an expert with these matters, my life is pretty busy - I thought I was still within the time allowed to appeal to the adjudicaters.

Quote from: stamfordman on 02 Oct, 2024 13:09Post the PCN hiding only name and address.Trouble is this is a no stopping contravention but it is fairly clear you were on manoeuvres. I can't find the original PCN so here's the Charge Certificate and the rejection. https://imgur.com/gallery/wJ9QoE3https://imgur.com/gallery/yzibY9u

Quote from: Incandescent on 02 Oct, 2024 11:31No clip, in fact no useful information at all. Please read this and update your post accordingly: -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/Apologies, I thought my description would suffice.https://youtu.be/z2hJwKrBTTk?feature=shared

I went to make U turn but had to stop for a few seconds to let cars past. At the end of the clip you can see me start to make the turn. I've already had my appeal denied, is this worth taking to the adjudicater?

That's great thank you, I originally asked on Reddit and mostly got 'just pay it you wally' so was expecting more of the same here.I've copy pasted the tribunal emails here and added a photo of the debt demand.The council had changed the permit system and I originally assumed that this must be the reason that the permit didn't exist. It was only later that I became aware of the 'basket timeout' issue.The first two PCNs where the appeal was allowed:London Tribunals, PO Box 10598,NOTTINGHAM, NG6 6DRTel: 020 7520 7200www.londontribunals.gov.uk25th April 2024Case Reference: 2240070545Please quote this in any correspondence yousend usLondon Borough of Havering(the Enforcement Authority)MY WIFE appealed against liability for the payment of the Penalty Charge in respect of:Vehicle Registration Number Y11 BOTPenalty Charge Notice HG60830782Full PCN Amount £ 130.00Contravention Date 8th November 2023Contravention Time 15:23Contravention Location Beltinge Road / Squirrels Heath RoadContravention Failing to comply with a sign indicating arestriction on vehicles entering apedestrian zoneAdjudicator's DecisionThe adjudicator, having considered the evidence submitted by the parties, has allowed the appeal.The reasons for the adjudicator's decision are enclosed.The adjudicator directs London Borough of Havering to cancel the Penalty Charge Notice.If any penalty or fees have already been paid, the Enforcement Authority must now issue a refundwithout delay. Enquiries regarding payment of the refund should be made to the EnforcementAuthority.An independent tribunal for environment, parking and traffic penalty appealsEnvironment and Traffic Adjudicators are supported by London Tribunals, a service provided by London CouncilsCalls to London Tribunals may be recordedAdjudicator's ReasonsThe Council has only provided an amending experimental Traffic Management Order. In the absenceof the Order which it amends it is impossible to be satisfied that the restriction relied on by the Councilwas in force.However even if it was this is a case where I see no reason to doubt that the Appellant believed shewas registered at all times. as a virtual permit holder. It transpires that the account shows "cancelledbasket timeout"; but what this means and the circumstances leading to it, in particular whether it arosethrough some fault on the Appellant's part, is wholly unexplained. Nor is it at all clear whether, and if so how, the Appellant would have been informed that she no longer had a permit.In the circumstances it seems to me that the Appellant was entitled to believe that she had a validpermit.The Appeals are allowed on both grounds.Edward HoughtonAdjudicator24th April 20242240070545HG60830782An independent tribunal for environment, parking and traffic penalty appealsEnvironment and Traffic Adjudicators are supported by London Tribunals, a service provided by London CouncilsCalls to London Tribunals may be recordedMY WIFE appealed against liability for the payment of the Penalty Charge in respect of:Vehicle Registration Number Y11 BOTPenalty Charge Notice HG60844641Full PCN Amount £ 130.00Contravention Date 15th November 2023Contravention Time 14:37Contravention Location Beltinge Road / Squirrels Heath RoadContravention Failing to comply with a sign indicating arestriction on vehicles entering apedestrian zoneAdjudicator's DecisionThe adjudicator, having considered the evidence submitted by the parties, has allowed the appeal.The reasons for the adjudicator's decision are enclosed.The adjudicator directs London Borough of Havering to cancel the Penalty Charge Notice.If any penalty or fees have already been paid, the Enforcement Authority must now issue a refundwithout delay. Enquiries regarding payment of the refund should be made to the EnforcementAuthority.The third PCN where the appeal was denied:London Tribunals, PO Box 10598,NOTTINGHAM, NG6 6DRTel: 020 7520 7200www.londontribunals.gov.uk4th May 2024Case Reference: 2240079608Please quote this in any correspondence yousend usMY WIFE-v-London Borough of Havering(the Enforcement Authority)MY WIFE appealed against liability for the payment of the Penalty Charge in respect of:Penalty Charge Notice HG60873526Full PCN Amount £ 130.00Contravention Date 27th November 2023Contravention Time 15:07Contravention Location Coombe Road / Beltinge RoadContravention Failing to comply with a sign indicating a restriction on vehicles entering apedestrian zoneAdjudicator's DecisionThe adjudicator, having considered the evidence submitted by the parties, has determined that theappeal against liability for the charge should be refused.The reasons for the adjudicator's decision are enclosed.The adjudicator directs as follows:I refuse the appeal.The full penalty charge must be paid within 28 days to:London Borough of HaveringTown HallMain RoadROMFORDRM1 3BBIf you do not pay the Enforcement Authority can issue a Charge certificate increasing the full penaltyAn independent tribunal for environment, parking and traffic penalty appealsEnvironment and Traffic Adjudicators are supported by London Tribunals, a service provided by London Councilscharge by a further 50%.An independent tribunal for environment, parking and traffic penalty appealsEnvironment and Traffic Adjudicators are supported by London Tribunals, a service provided by London CouncilsThe review of the differing decisions:London Tribunals, PO Box 10598,NOTTINGHAM, NG6 6DRTel: 020 7520 7200www.londontribunals.gov.uk13th June 2024Case Reference: 2240079608Please quote this in any correspondence yousend usMY WIFE-v-London Borough of Havering(the Enforcement Authority)MY WIFE appealed against liability for the payment of the Penalty Charge in respect of:Penalty Charge Notice HG60873526Full PCN Amount £ 130.00Contravention Date 27th November 2023Contravention Time 15:07Contravention Location Coombe Road / Beltinge RoadContravention Failing to comply with a sign indicating arestriction on vehicles entering apedestrian zoneAdjudicator's DecisionThis case comes before the adjudicator under Regulation 11 of the Road Traffic (Parking Adjudicators(London) Regulations 1993 (as amended) by way of an application review of the original decision onthe appeal.The adjudicator, having considered the evidence submitted by the parties, has determined that the appeal against liability for the charge should be refused.The reasons for the adjudicator's decision are enclosed.The full penalty charge must be paid within 28 days to:London Borough of HaveringTown HallMain RoadROMFORDRM1 3BBAn independent tribunal for environment, parking and traffic penalty appealsEnvironment and Traffic Adjudicators are supported by London Tribunals, a service provided by London CouncilsIf you do not pay the Enforcement Authority can issue a Charge certificate increasing the full penalty charge by a further 50%.An independent tribunal for environment, parking and traffic penalty appealsEnvironment and Traffic Adjudicators are supported by London Tribunals, a service provided by London CouncilsAdjudicator's ReasonsThis is an application by the Appellant for a review of the decision of my learned colleague Mr Moore refusing his appeal. The grounds for the application are essentially that in what is an identical case I allowed the Appeal.I set out the two decisions below:-Mr MooreThe appellant submitted that they had a permit to park in the safe streets zone, but when the Authority changed the system in relation to obtaining such permits they were not aware, and only became aware once they started to receive PCN's.In reaching a decision in this matter I have considered all the evidence before me, including photographic and documentary evidence and CCTV footage. There is ample credible and reliable evidence [which appears not to be disputed either] that the driver failed to comply with the restriction on vehicles entering the pedestrian zone. Regarding the permit issue, it would appear that the appellant did not have a "valid" permit at any time prior to the contravention; there is no reliable evidence of this. The previous application for a permit did not result in a permit being issued; rather, there was an invalid permit resulting from cancellation due to "basket timeout". The most recent and only permit was issued on 3rd December 2023, which was after the date of the contravention. There are no valid grounds to allow this appeal.Myself, Mr HoughtonThe Council has only provided an amending experimental Traffic Management Order. In the absence of the Order which it amends it is impossible to be satisfied that the restriction relied on by the Council was in force. However even if it was this is a case where I see no reason to doubt that the Appellant believed she was registered at all times. as a virtual permit holder. It transpires that the account shows "cancelled basket timeout"; but what this means and the circumstances leading to it, in particular whether it arose through some fault on the Appellant's part, is wholly unexplained. Nor is it at all clear whether, and if so how, the Appellant would have been informed that she no longer had a permit.In the circumstances it seems to me that the Appellant was entitled to believe that she had a valid permit.The Appeals are allowed on both grounds. I am not at all surprised that this application has been made. Regrettably this is one of those cases where Adjudicators came to a different conclusion on the facts. I consider that my own decision was correct, otherwise I would not have made it, However I am unable to say that Mr Moore's reasoned decision taking a different view was clearly wrong and not one he could not have reasonably have arrived at. This is really an application inviting me to sit as a Court of Appeal on a colleague , which is not the purpose of the review procedure . It is of course the case that identical considerations would apply if the Council had sought to review my decision on the basis that I should have refused the Appeal on the basis that Mr Moore was correct. The Appellant will no doubt consider it unsatisfactory that this situation can arise; however it is inevitable that in dealing with cases involving factual issues judges of fact will, on occasion, take different views A common example is questions of the clarity otherwise of traffic signage.. Whilst he might feel disappointed in in my learned colleagues decision he might also reflect that it is possible that it is I who have erred on the side of generosity rather than Mr Moore taking an unnecessarily strict view.There are no grounds in law on which I can change Mr Moore's decision which therefore stands .An independent tribunal for environment, parking and traffic penalty appealsEnvironment and Traffic Adjudicators are supported by London Tribunals, a service provided by London CouncilsCalls to London Tribunals may be recordedEdward HoughtonAdjudicator12th June 20242240079608HG60873526

Debt Enforcement Officer Harrassing My Wife. A safe streets zone was introduced in our area in England. As we live inside the zone I applied for free permits for my wife and I's cars. After several months my wife received two fines for driving within the zone both of which I appealed.It turns out the permit for my wife's car didn't go through as the 'basket timed out'. I took both appeals to the independent adjudicater, one was upheld, one wasn't. When I questioned the two differing decisions I was told that they both could be seen as correct. We then received a letter from a debt recovery agency for the unpaid fine. My wife said she'd pay it but forgot to (she paid another PCN instead). Two days ago a debt recovery agent put a hand delivered demand through our letterbox (now £455). He also made several aggressive and threatening phone calls to my wife at 7am.Where do we stand? We were resigned to paying after the letter but now after the aggressive bullying of the enforcement officer we feel like we should continue to fight it.