Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - ManxTom

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
You have shown us 2 envelopes. One is addressed by hand to the SCU, has a postage stamp, has been franked and has a sticker with returned ticked on it.
The other envelope has first class printed on the top right corner and seemingly has no address on it.

The first envelope seems quite self explanatory, beyond the questions of how/why it was refused and its resultant status in law (whether as a matter of law it was served or not served).

The second envelope, not so much.

That postage stamp wasn't valid when it was posted(?).  See @RichardW's post.


... The Civil Enforcement Officer's notes in the evidence pack state;
Therefore the Council's own evidence shows that no Penalty Charge Notice was actually served on the appellant or his vehicle...

... If you do not understand the point and wish to explore it further then I suggest you request an adjournment at tomorrow's (Monday's) hearing.

Just playing Devil's Advocate but do the CEO's notes say the the driver drove off before the PCN was served?

The note says the driver returned after the PCN had been issued* and drove off before the CEO could photo it.  What does "HTD" mean at the beginning of the note?

Seems odd to me that the council would be arguing that the PCN had been handed to the driver if they thought their own CEO's notes contradicted that argument.  (OK - I know, it's not odd - they're just incompetent   :)  )

*I know it says issued and not served but I'm not certain that that note says unambiguously that the driver drove off before it was served.  It's open to interpretation...


I don't think he (or should it be "they"?) is a FMOTL though.

He's not once mentioned Magna Carta, common law or Admiralty courts, and he hasn't said "I (or "we") didn't contract to pay CAZ and ULEZ fees!"

Maybe it's a Welsh thing...

A Notice issued that long after the offence is all but certain to NOT be the first issued.

It is either a reminder to one (not received/not seen) sent earlier (not all say they are a reminder, some are quite literally just a reprint with just the issue date changed) or a follow up Notice after a the RK has named the keeper.

LOOK AT and CHECK the V5c, DO NOT take the keeper's word as gospel, we see too many posts from those convinced they are the RK who turn out not to be (address wrong or it's a leased or Financed car where the lender is the RK) to take peoples word for it.

I've seen the V5. I've also been told by the RK that they responded to a reminder having not received any prior letter.

Didn't the family member think to tell you that they'd previously received a reminder?


... I can see a manhole cover immediately ahead of your car and a gulley grating behind. Your car is also flanked by new(ish) kerb stones many of which seem to be flush with the carriageway.

GSV puts this combination well away from the marked bay** and right on the DRL...

On the contrary, don't the manhole cover and the grating actually put the OP's car slap bang in the middle of the marked bay and well away from the DRLs?

See the GSV from July 2021  -


... And why have you chosen to not engage with the council's formal complaints procedure which could then lead to the Ombudsman, a process which has been put in place to deal with, inter alia, claims of maladministration without the need to resort to courts. Proportionality and least expense...

Because the OP is acting from a misguided sense of injustice and "the principle of it", and seems to be intent on cutting their nose off to spite their face?

Seems to me to be a daft choice of hill to die on...

(Particularly if Bristol have included the original unpaid 9 toll in the charge which many people seem to think is sufficient to invalidate the ticket from the outset.)

Just an update : i used the new online system (online plea service), and submitted guilty with a request to attend hearing.

However i was reading my case and police statement : he essentially stated he stopped me at 12:15 and he saw myself / my partner on the temp insurance website attempting to purchase coverage, around 20 mins later i showed him a temporary insurance from with the time 12:30...

How could he possibly know what website you were looking at and that you were buying insurance?  Was he looking over your shoulder(s)?

ill take the points and not lose three hours of my life being droned on at about doing 26 in in a now 20mph major A road, these 20MPH zones, LTN's and the like are a farse, driven by cyclists with clip boards who contribute zero to poy for all the stupid ill placed bike lanes.

Actually, i wonder if the mamil's will abide by the highway code of not overtaking on the left now they can actually go faster than a car is allowed to. ::)

Seems a pity that you should decide unnecessarily to accept 3 points because of a couple of falsely held preconceived notions you have...

As I explained previously, I attended a course last year and found it rather helpful with no droning and no talking down and not at all an inconvenience.  You might have found that attending one would have been quite informative if you drive for a living.  You might have discovered, for example, that a 20mph limit doesn't necessarily have to have roundels on the road.

You also might have learned that 20mph limits have nothing to do with cyclists and rather a lot more to do with extensive scientific evidence proving that 20 mph limits significantly reduce the risk of serious injury to pedestrians.

But of course you don't want to know any of that...

Apologies, I used the wrong terminology. It is failure to furnish.
So do I have to plead not guilty to both charges and offer a plea bargain for speeding only if F2F is dropped? Or can I plead guilty to only speeding on the form and not guilty to F2F with reasoning and avoid court? I understand may be best not to admit any guilt at this stage and go to court.
Any specific wording required in my plea bargain or will just a couple of clear sentences be enough.
I am also worried about going to court and saying the wrong thing but if a fine is in the way, Id like to avoid extra costs for solicitor advise and representation.
Thank you

I'm sure others will correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that you should plead NOT GUILTY to both charges and in the mitigation/reason for plea part of the form you say something along the lines of:  "I've pleaded not guilty to both charges but if the s172 Failure to Furnish charge is dropped - and only if it is dropped - I would plead Guilty to the speeding offence"

Basically what @The Rookie has already told you.

If you find they won't accept that on paper, you'll have to attend court on the day and put exactly the same proposition to the prosecutor.


... I will provide keepers details but its difficult to recollect when this happened.
Second named driver was at work in Finchley at that time...

What do you mean by you "will provide keepers details"?  You need to identify the driver

You've said you are the Registered Keeper.  Are you saying that someone else had possession of the car at the time of the alleged offence, but that you don't know if they or some other person was drivving?


... Can the speeding fine be challenged with the speed being at the lower limit? What are the successful appeals that can be made for this low limit prosecution?...

What makes you think you could challenge being prosecuted at 35mph?

The speed limit is 30mph.  Enforcement starts at 35mph so they've already given you  over 4mph for free.


We tend to use the speed limit showing on Waze screen whenever we use it for navigation as it tends to be more accurate than the one showing in our car. During the drive, we realised that we had not changed back the distance unit in the Waze settings to the Uk 'mile' as they use 'km' in Cyprus. I don't know if this was before the location of the camera or after.

I can't see how showing units in KM/h and following those for a speed reading would affect the offence. If anything it should have made it harder to exceed the limit...

I assume that eg a 30mph limit would show as a "50" limit if their Waze app (or whatever it is) hadn't been converted back to imperial from metric?

(But I'm only guessing.  I've never used any kind of satnav and I rely on looking at road signs to know what the speed limit is.  I wouldn't rely on a device to tell me)

@NewJudge - a big thank you!

Thanks for a clear outline of the process, really helpful to have it laid out this way.


Just to add to the "Two precautions" suggested by @NewJudge:

First, as you were not the driver the NIP/s172 request addressed to you might allow you to nominate your husband online.  Obviously if you are allowed to do that (make sure you read the instructions as to how to reply carefully) it means your reply can't go astray in the mail.

Second, when your husband receives his notice to identify himself as the driver, again read the instructions carefully as to how to reply.  Some constabularies (eg Norfolk & Suffolk) allow you to identify yourself as the driver online, but most of them still require the return via snail mail of a completed and signed form, in which case NewJudge's precautions become very relevant.

Wouldn't it be sufficient simply to point out to the adjudicator that the sign's meaning as expressed in the Welsh language is different from its meaning as expressed in English?

If the OP's father is bi-lingual and can see the difference, how can he reasonably be expected to know whether he needed a "licence" as indicated in Welsh (thrwydded) or a "permit" as the English says (which would have been "caniatad" in Welsh).

If the sign is bi-linguinal but expresses different meanings in both languages, how is the motorist to know what they need in order to be able to park legitimately?

Would asking for a meeting in Welsh complicate it unnecesssarily?

(NB  -  I can't speak Manx let alone Welsh.  I'm simply taking northwalian's explanation at face value)

The contravention is causing a vehicle to enter the box then having to stop due to the presence of stationary vehicles

The video does not show the entry into the box nor the reason for the stop, ...

Perhaps I'm mistaken but the video does show both doesn't it?  From 54 secs et seq...

Pages: [1] 2 3 4