Author Topic: Enforcement of traffic penalties by London Councils, training of staff, changes in the law, training of adjudicators.  (Read 114 times)

0 Members and 7 Guests are viewing this topic.

I respectfully suggest that we all write to our MPs in similar terms to cut off all the heads of the Hydra.

All we are doing at present is sticking pins into the underbelly.

I attached various cases as examples and one screenshot of the Havering website.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1bB_hlGKDk9JlNIGrVyQLR7kY-n4Bm8lo/view

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vKLwunE12o3eOLQMKxOQCftWDtXZf1zf/view

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1y9EBm4X5JM23Y9YFPl97Cu2Lc6qs0lZg/view

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ff7PMwPtWQqNhUlTQQ3LbP1kzHMvAKu_/view

Case reference 2250437817. Lost: told to go to the High Court.

Havering web site wrong grounds re 2003 Act: https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/EoJpWU6_xl.png


******

Dear Sir or Madam

As a "very experienced representative" (according to several London Tribunals adjudicators), my heart bleeds when I observe hearings in which I am not allowed to speak and I witness appellants losing cases when they are not fully aware of my (and others') toolkit to win an appeal. This includes failure to consider, misinformation on council's websites, non-compliant documents and the premature issue of charge certificates.

I am also deeply concerned about the level of knowledge of those employed  by many councils, their training and, indeed, the training of new adjudicators and their appointment.

Furthermore, I am concerned about the high threshold to be met when applying for costs: I believe that this should be relaxed and to include situations where councils issue a DO NOT CONTEST.

Finally, there should be a change in law concerning costs and review applications. Following the recent ruling as mentioned in my recent review case re Hubba Karim v Kingston, if an adjudicator is "wrong in law", one must automatically go to  the High Court.* This is grossly unjust since there already exists an Upper Tribunal which could hear cases IF the legislation were changed.

I politely request an urgent meeting to discuss these issues with the possibility of my having an appointment to meet with the Secretary of  State for Transport and/or any other members of the relevant committee.  It cannot be right that I am placed into the allegorical position of David v Goliath when this global abuse of power is rife and people are bluntly being ripped off and taken for a ride.

I am deeply concerned by all this.

Yours sincerely

007


*

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2023/2889.pdf
« Last Edit: July 27, 2026, 11:04:37 pm by Hippocrates »
@Incandescent!

I AM ABLE TO TAKE ON MORE CASES AS A REPRESENTATIVE AT THE LONDON TRIBUNALS. I HATE RETIREMENT.


If you do not challenge, you join "The Mugged Club".

cp8759 and mrmustard are true geniuses. I know my place in the hierarchy of The Three Musketeers. 😊 "The Clinician", "The Gentleman" and "The Showman"

There are "known knowns" which we may never have wished to know. This applies to them. But in the field the idea that there are also "unknown unknowns" doesn't apply as they hide in the aleatoric lottery. I know this is true and need to be prepared knowing the "unknown unknowns" may well apply.

To Socrates from "Hippocrates"

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


« Last Edit: August 03, 2026, 11:00:32 pm by Hippocrates »
@Incandescent!

I AM ABLE TO TAKE ON MORE CASES AS A REPRESENTATIVE AT THE LONDON TRIBUNALS. I HATE RETIREMENT.


If you do not challenge, you join "The Mugged Club".

cp8759 and mrmustard are true geniuses. I know my place in the hierarchy of The Three Musketeers. 😊 "The Clinician", "The Gentleman" and "The Showman"

There are "known knowns" which we may never have wished to know. This applies to them. But in the field the idea that there are also "unknown unknowns" doesn't apply as they hide in the aleatoric lottery. I know this is true and need to be prepared knowing the "unknown unknowns" may well apply.

To Socrates from "Hippocrates"