Free Traffic Legal Advice

Have read the EP.  Should be fun.      Cogitating all the issues at present.

This should be straightforward.  Looking forward to the details. 

I would apply for costs actually.  See what cp says.  If he disagrees, I am happy to make an application on your behalf. No cost or risk involved.

This is just another example of a council not adducing evidence, forcing one to go to the Tribunal and I say this conduct meets the threshold of wholly unreasonable.  Barking and Dagenham are another.

I bet you were in and out in 3 minutes!?

Well done for sticking with it. 

Call the Tribunal and ask if the council have adduced their evidence.

•   Go online and register the appeal. London Tribunals website.
•   Ground:  no breach.
•   I rely upon my informal and formal representations and full submissions will follow upon receipt of the council’s evidence pack.
•   Do not mention you are being represented at this time as you can always send an e mail later before the hearing.
•   Choose personal hearing any time after 11 a.m.


I have tailored this advice for good reason! 

I further bring a collateral challenge on the basis that the PCN is unenforceable because the taken without consent ground clearly fetters to theft by its very wording that a crime report be provided. Therefore, this inaccurate reflection of the statutory ground does not take into account that a relative, or friend, may have taken the vehicle without the owner's permission so that the owner would not necessarily, if at all, report the matter to the Police in such circumstances.

Havering's staff need INSET.


Case reference 2230439332

Cost Details
Application by Appellant
Decision date 28 Nov 2023
Adjudicator Edward Houghton
Decision Cost award allowed
Direction -
Reasons The Appellant did not appear in person but was represented by Mr Morgan. Having heard his submissions I consider that this is a case where the statutory criteria for the making of an Order are met. The legal deficiencies in the Council’s documentation were drawn to its attention at an early stage and were in my view incontrovertibly correct, potential grounds of appeal appearing that were inapplicable in the case of Bus Lane contraventions. The Council should have accepted the representations on this point and its failure to do so was in my view wholly unreasonable. The amount claimed seems to me a modest and proportionate sum and I make the order in that amount.

   

They must be raking in thousands with these outrageously-worded documents.  Kingston has the same errors on their PCNs.

Nasty.  Wait for the Order for Recovery. A dysfunctional outfit indeed.