Free Traffic Legal Advice

I will take a look this weekend.  Then I will suggest a draft tweak of your own.

I suggest an immediate FOIR to ask when the signage had/has been repainted etc.  I will PM you.  I think the strongest ground here is the signage and where you entered the lane.

Well, they have messed up the 28 days time period. The law:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/1996/9/...edule/1/enacted

Rejection of representations against enforcement notice

5Where any representations are made under paragraph 2 above but the council concerned do not accept that a ground has been established, the notice served under sub-paragraph (10) of the said paragraph 2 (in this Schedule referred to as “the notice of rejection”) must—

(a)state that a charge certificate may be served under paragraph 8 below unless before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of service of the notice of rejection—
(i)the penalty charge is paid; or
(ii)the person on whom the notice is served appeals to a traffic adjudicator against the penalty charge; and
(b)describe in general terms the form and manner in which such an appeal must be made;and may contain such other information as the council consider appropriate.

QUOTE (Greyout @ Wed, 27 Sep 2023 - 10:32) *
https://imgur.com/a/gvtQTrU - Notice of Rejection (with my personal info redacted)

NOR date is today. How did you receive it? By e mail? If by post, this is impossible.

As it is now Tribunal time, I am happy to take this one on and represent you if you wish.

Oh right I see, can it please be changed to Victory23. Thank you.

Please send him a private message as he is very busy.

I would just keep it simple and require them to consider your previous representations as the formal submissions against the Enforcement Notice.

Good luck re de minimis.

Tommy's Second Sequel v Kingston. Interview with Mr Sledge: https://youtu.be/Izq6v54bEwk


Mr Sledge raised several important issues in his challenge and formal representations against the Bus Lane ticket.  The Parking Operations Manager, Mrs Anita Haycock-Roelefeld, firstly rejected all the arguments about the signage and the wording on the ticket.  She then changed her mind completely.  Perhaps she will now consider her position and so should Mr Ian Manders who is allegedly in charge of this fiasco.  Or simply reimburse all recipients of the illegally-worded Penalty Charge Notice concerning the timing periods.

Well done Mr Sledge for persevering and granting me an interview.

After our interview, I shouted at several motorcyclists who also went down the bus lane at Eden Street.  They simply did not care because they knew that the camera did not point at their vehicle registration mark.  And so, this demonstrates even more prejudicial and unfair conduct from this council.  Only buses, cycles and taxis are allowed!

*****************************

Informal representations which were rejected:

Dear Sirs

Ref: PCN.........................VRM........................

Ground: The Penalty Charge Notice is non-compliant

The PCN completely mis-states the two periods of payments regarding the 14 days and 28 days. Therefore, the PCN should be cancelled as it is substantially non-compliant and does not contain the mandatory information it must according to the legislation.

The relevant part of the legislation is here:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/1...

The following information is mandatory:

(3)A penalty charge notice under this Part of this Act must state—

©that the penalty charge must be paid before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of the notice;

(d)that if the penalty charge is paid before the end of the period of 14 days beginning with the date of the notice, the amount of the penalty charge will be reduced by the specified proportion;


Should you not agree to do so, I am fully prepared to pursue this fundamental matter as far as the Tribunal to seek adjudication on the issue.


Ground: signage is not fit for purpose

According to your own video evidence the road legend on turning from Union Street is illegible and this indicates a statutory failure to maintain it thus rendering it not fit for purpose in terms of conveying the Traffic Management Order. Furthermore, the ramping also obscures the signage until it is too late.

Also, some of the warning signage on Union Street is so twisted as also not to be fit for purpose.

Finally, the video does not show all the signage allegedly passed.

Please cancel the PCN accordingly.

Yours faithfully