Author Topic: Moving traffic PCNs and disconnect between the PCN and councils' website  (Read 164 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Hippocrates

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1261
  • Karma: +16/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: The Cosmos.
    • View Profile
I have just noticed over the last two days that the infamous Barbour Logic misstates the 28th day when the penalty may increase to 130. Viva Barbour Logic!  :D

Lambeth:

https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/motorbike-52m-pcn-lambeth/msg27420/#msg27420

Southwark point 3 ff:

https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/southwark-council-pcn/msg27334/#msg27334

So it is always worth checking the status of one's PCN before paying or challenging it.  ;)
« Last Edit: June 25, 2024, 08:37:17 am by Hippocrates »
There are known knowns which, had we known, we would never have wished to know. It is known that this also applies to the known unknowns. However, when one attends a hearing, Mr Rumsfeld's idea that there are also unknown unknowns fails to apply because, anyone who is in the know, knows that unknown unknowns are purely a deception otherwise known as an aleatory experience or also known as a lottery. I know that I know this to be a fact and, in this knowledge, I know that I am fully prepared to present my case but, paradoxically, in full knowledge that the unknown unknowns may well apply in view of some adjudicators' lack of knowing what they ought to know through no fault of their own.

"Hippocrates"

ἔοικα γοῦν τούτου γε σμικρῷ τινι αὐτῷ τούτῳ σοφώτερος εἶναι, ὅτι ἃ μὴ οἶδα οὐδὲ οἴομαι εἰ

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter


H C Andersen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1055
  • Karma: +22/-7
    • View Profile
How would these errors, which do not stand alone but simply conflict with what RKs etc. have already been formally and procedurally notified about, avail them at adjudication especially if the RK has not had an offer of payment
(at the correct level)refused?

It's probably ammunition, but I cannot see it as being a silver bullet.

Hippocrates

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1261
  • Karma: +16/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Location: The Cosmos.
    • View Profile
https://bit.ly/2ALghSS

Adjudications key cases  586 ff especially 601
« Last Edit: June 25, 2024, 12:51:49 pm by Hippocrates »
There are known knowns which, had we known, we would never have wished to know. It is known that this also applies to the known unknowns. However, when one attends a hearing, Mr Rumsfeld's idea that there are also unknown unknowns fails to apply because, anyone who is in the know, knows that unknown unknowns are purely a deception otherwise known as an aleatory experience or also known as a lottery. I know that I know this to be a fact and, in this knowledge, I know that I am fully prepared to present my case but, paradoxically, in full knowledge that the unknown unknowns may well apply in view of some adjudicators' lack of knowing what they ought to know through no fault of their own.

"Hippocrates"

ἔοικα γοῦν τούτου γε σμικρῷ τινι αὐτῷ τούτῳ σοφώτερος εἶναι, ὅτι ἃ μὴ οἶδα οὐδὲ οἴομαι εἰ

cp8759

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4876
  • Karma: +113/-4
    • View Profile
@Hippocrates moved this to the flame pit.

Also please note row numbers on the spreadsheet cannot be relied upon, for the simple reason that I keep adding cases all the time so stuff will shift about.
I practice law in the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, London Tribunals, the First-tier tribunal for Scotland, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for Northern Ireland, but I am not a solicitor nor a barrister. Notwithstanding this, I voluntarily apply the cab rank rule. I am a member of the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends, my membership number is FM193.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order

H C Andersen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1055
  • Karma: +22/-7
    • View Profile
Can't get beyond 573 :-\

And I'm reminded of situations which still crop up, although less frequently, which is when an authority includes the actual 14 and 28-day dates in reg. 9 PCNs. Although there were some successes on this point early in the piece, as I recall the consensus view now between the two tribunals is that provided the statutory words or meaning are clearly stated then no PI exists, and this is when 'incorrect' info is actually included in a PCN.
« Last Edit: June 27, 2024, 09:13:21 am by H C Andersen »

cp8759

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4876
  • Karma: +113/-4
    • View Profile
Can't get beyond 573 :-\

Not sure what you mean? Can you share a screenshot or a screen recording?
I practice law in the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, London Tribunals, the First-tier tribunal for Scotland, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for Northern Ireland, but I am not a solicitor nor a barrister. Notwithstanding this, I voluntarily apply the cab rank rule. I am a member of the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends, my membership number is FM193.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order