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 - Grant Urismo

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]
76
The Flame Pit / Re: TFL judicial review
« on: August 31, 2023, 10:20:12 pm »
Just because I haven't seen this point mentioned in this thread... a CEO can (and should) check for a blue badge and dashboard clock and record useful evidence about them if they are present, fixed CCTV can't reliably do this and it's unreasonable to expect blue badge holders to have to appeal a constant stream of tickets for lawful behaviour.

If this point isn't considered at the judicial review then I expect disability discrimination might provide a second avenue to banning the use of CCTV for parking enforcement.

77
I expect Nick Freeman might be touting for business at the judicial review stage, which I would very much like to see. The secretary of state may well have signed a piece of paper that says a sign with the five* words "Ultra low emission ULEZ zone" conveys the existence of a charge and directs motorists to the TFL website, but that doesn't make it true.

Given the camera authorisation fiasco, I wouldn't be too surprised if TfL had actually forgotten to get the LEZ ones authorised.


*Or four, if you take into account the fact that ULEZ isn't actually a word**

** Unless you're Macedonian, in which case it is a word which translates to 'Get in' or Finnish in which case it translates to 'Get out'... which doesn't help much.

78
It seems that the argument I've made on Pepipoo in the past that a sign saying something like "Ultra low emission ULEZ zone" does not sufficiently convey the details of the restriction to motorists has been used successfully in court by well known lawyer Nick "Mr Loophole" Freeman:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12452271/A-blow-ULEZ-expansion-plan-Scaffolder-wins-legal-ruling-signs-ultra-low-emission-zones-sister-scheme-not-lawful.html

The Daily Mail article is short on legal detail (and long on Khan-bashing), and this is actually a case about existing LEZ signage not ULEZ expansion signage despite the headline, but it does say "TfL insisted the signs were deemed lawful by the Department of Transport more than a decade ago and said it is investigating why certain evidence was not submitted." which hints to me that perhaps the Secretary of State did not actually sign off on the signs at all!

I expect this isn't the last we'll hear of Elevation Access Ltd v TfL.

79
I expect he meant ZGM9181 - please do start your own thread ZGM9181, as you can see things tend to get very confusing if you don't!

80
The Flame Pit / Re: BBB
« on: August 01, 2023, 01:02:09 pm »
Nothing in the first video that he couldn't have said in 2 minutes rather than 9. Is he really a trained barrister?

Trained in optimising monetisation, I expect. Youtube puts an extra set of adverts in videos that are longer than 8 minutes.

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]