Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]
91
Is the vehicle leased?
92
I'd be very surprised if Oxford CC has not discussed this matter internally since they were made aware of it many years ago. Obviously they have a financial interest in denying any wrong doing. Have you CP8759 made any FOI requests from either Oxford or the communications between DfT and Oxford CC concerning this matter?
I have but it's all covered by legal professional privilege, which doesn't expire for 20 years from when the information was created. While for Exeter the 2030 cutoff isn't that far away now, Oxford's information is much more recent. The only way to sort this out would be to take it to court, but obviously given the choice of a criminal trial or a modest payment to make it go away, most people chose the easy option even if they are offered free representation.
93
OK, so its a letter from bailiffs (Newlyns), that is the first stage of bailiff enforcment called "Compliance". This is a statutory letter advising you of the debt and giving you the opportunity to pay it and close the matter. The £75 bailiff fee is a statutory amount. The next stage is the visit stage, when they will add on another £235, again a statutory amount. The debt owed to the council consists of the PCN penalty, plus 50% for the Charge Certificate, and £10 for the TEC registration

So the PCN debt is registered at TEC. The sole process you can now use to try to revert the process back to the stage when you had submitted representations is to submit an Out-of-Time declaration. As this is a London moving traffic PCN, it will have been served under the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003. Therefore you must submit an OOT Statutory Declaration that you submitted reps but received no reply. The forms you need are PE2 and PE3. These require witnessing by a solicitor, or at the local county court, before submission.

https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/traffic-enforcement-centre-forms

Great care is needed in filling in both forms, so I would suggest you contact this website for advice.

www.bailiffadviceonline.co.uk

Sheila, (who runs it), can, for a fee, also prepare your submission. ANy OOT submission is always passed to the enforcement authority who can, and invariably do, object to it, so your info on the submission must be bullet-proof.

In the meantime we recommend paying the bailiffs now to avoid any further costs to you. If your OOT SD is accepted, the matter will be reverted and as you have submitted reps, will be passed to the adjudicators at London Tribunals.
94
IMO, if you qualify the issue should be raised with the council's external auditor. Contact the council and find out when their accounts are published and how objections to these may be raised with the external auditor- there's a 30-day window.

https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Council-accounts-a-guide-to-your-rights.pdf

This is not for objecting to your PCN as such, it is a means of focusing attention on the principle.

If you're successful, and it appears that the legal position is clear, then the external auditor would include this in their report to the COUNCIL.

You get to the highest level of responsibility and decision making and bypass the foothills/molehills of self-interested officers in the parking hierarchy. 

95
Do you have the means to play a DVD? I ask because this is the evidence upon which TfL would rely and you and we need to see what it shows. The instructions for viewing or obtaining are on the reverse of p1 of the PCN. 'The penalty charge will be placed on hold whilst this is processed'.
96
Notice addressed to RK.
RK was not the driver.

Alleged to have overstayed the time paid for.

Any advice gratefully accepted.



https://ibb.co/7xSy7vHH
https://ibb.co/q3hnY8nH
97
Thank you for the reply.

This is the letter I received. It's the only document that has been sent to my current address:





98


Apologies - I have reset the google drive links to public. These should work now.

99
Case Number please.

That would be 2250600758.

Incidentally, of 20 Lambeth cases on Tuedsday, 13 were allowed and only 7 refused. I make that a 65% success rate for appellants!
100
I'd be very surprised if Oxford CC has not discussed this matter internally since they were made aware of it many years ago. Obviously they have a financial interest in denying any wrong doing. Have you CP8759 made any FOI requests from either Oxford or the communications between DfT and Oxford CC concerning this matter?
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]