Has Anyone Reclaimed Paid PCN

[bmwman]

Hi Pat

Thank you for the reply. Looks like I may have boobed used a form from Hastings web site. Heading on this form Freedom of Information Act 2000. So will have to resend SARs letter with Cheque for £10.00

Will this be Ok as SARs letter


The Information Officer,
Hastings Borough Council
Town Hall
Queens Road
HastingsDated 19/12/2007
East Sussex
TN34 1QR
Subject Access Request


Dear Sir/Madam


Registration Numbers
Registered Keeper


Please supply me with a complete list of penalty charge notices, notices to owner and transactions relating to them issued to me by yourselves or your subcontractors and/or their representatives. Along with copies of letters form NPAS pertaining to non-compliance and invalidity of Hasting Borough Councils PCNs.

I would also be grateful if you could provide me with a list of payments and correspondence relating to my parking history with your organisation over the last six years along with any other information that you may have accrued within your records about me or my above listed vehicle.

I enclose the statutory maximum fee of £10. You have 40 days from date of service to comply. If there is specific information which you require in order to satisfy yourself as to my identity, please let me know by return. I am happy to collect the data from yourselves and prove my identity in person.

Yours faithfully,

[bmwman]

Hi All

Finally received a reply to my Freedom of Information Act letter from Hastings.




Here's the NtO (Notice the Date of Issue).





Back of NtO




and here's the Charge Certificate (notice the date the NtO was sent)




How can they sent an NtO two days befor it is issued or charge certificate wrong.

Sorry about the large images

Have a happy New Year Everyone

[Medusa]

This derogation of statutory duty and totally unacceptable conduct should render the cancellation of the charge certificate immediately.

My 700 page case against the local council goes live in a few days, precisely this is dealt with.
My council lost £4000 in our first exchange at court last April. The problem is widespread and endemic, needing multiple cases pointing at PATAS, AND the county court. Not for the faint hearted.

Come back for a link that will be posted by me on the complete thorough exposure of the methods used to bully, and breach the EU HR Protocol 5 Article 6, without a doubt, and provable with your paperwork. The countryside is littered with evidence of this, few understsand the remedy though.
You need to watch PATAS, they are also being called in to question as to how they formerly thought this utterly unacceptable, and now are changing the face of semantics, and truth because of the codependency of revenue. Also track what they do behind your back, while the case is at apeal, they go further and get the debt registered at TEC, and breach CPR 75.


Here is the page of all the breaches of acts carried out by councils, in their serious plunder and bullying tactics to the weak and uninformed.
Some large issues are building in this section Schedule 6 and CPR 75.


http://logiclaw.co.uk/S6T.html


http://logiclaw.co.uk/S6T.html#pd


Going on now for several years. My council lost £4000 in our first exchange at court,

The Adjudicator said that issued as it was whilst the appeal was pending, this was an entirely unlawful demand for money, coupled with the threat of court action. For a public authority to issue such a document was utterly unacceptable. But this was not an isolated case.

The case going live in a few days now. Thery have been approached to reconcile the issue, and prefer to avoid the matter contrinuing the spin and sin. Here is the forthcoming index.

1. The Main Issues
2. Chronological Schedule of issues
3. The claim issued as an injunction served after six weeks reading.
4. The claim page one. Winter wasn't interested in a money claim.
5. SEVENTEEN breached statutes all for £50.
6. Three non-compliant flaws on the original PCN identified, but NOT the central issue, that was simply the council's policy t serve detriments for contravention trivia, while semantically trivialising their OFFENCES.
7. The Judge's effective comments at the hearing.
8. The briefly worded face saving order.
9. Council Exchanges between Winter,
   1. Chief Executive Officer,
   2. Correspondence officers,
   3. Locum Solicitor,
   4. Acting head of Law department,
   5. Chief Lawyer,
   6. Barrister called in to defend the case since Winter would NOT
      accept the cancellation of the PCN,
   7. Inviting them to come to 'caught' and collect their prize.
10. Copied to the Mayor, Councillors, Member of Parliament and Prime Minister, response – SILENCE.
11. Re-assurances that the council FULLY uphold the Disability Discrimination Act, AND FULLY uphold the human rights ACT, Proceeding immediately to breach both, for reasons of not wanting to meet Winter in a PATAS hearing or a Court.
12. Cancellation of a falsely manufactured and fraudulent Charge Certificate, issued in breach of schedule 6 of the RTA 1991, done frequently.
13. TWENTY FALSE representations; just the introduction, under the Fraud act 2006.
14. Twenty Contrarieties , contradictions incontrovertible questions then asked in;
    
    
    A notice to admit facts. NONE DENIED.
    
15. Winter loses three stones in weight, in three months from the stress, and medical checks at the hospital revealed five added conditions of deterioration to his health. On realising and making determinations of the cause, he lodged the claim on 11th December 2006. By the time the case material had been read, some six weeks, he stopped losing weight and his health and life was no longer under immediate threat.
16. Appeal schedule before the hearing?
17. Winter invites the solicitors to attend as witnesses, they get choreographed with exeats, and new team makes their introit.
18. Perjurous witness statement produced, as the case material, backdated, and the cognitive dissonance shown in the court with utter precision. Remainder not shown.
19. Tautological and self defining arguments; without material content, from the Legal council.
20. Case struck out no order for costs. Council take away a £4,000 loss.
21. Judge assures Winter he has not yet had, and is entitled to; Magna Carta, 40, “To NO man will we deny or delay Justice”, EIGHTEEN months later, Winter invites council to give him this right, they sidestep the question.
22. Judge assures Winter he has not had, and is entitled to; his EU Human Rights, Protocol 5 Article 6, to a fair and pubic hearing. EIGHTEEN months later, Winter invites council to give him this right, they sidestep the question.
23. Winter leaves a document with the court shortly after the brief hearing, stating that if he should suffer continuity of detriment to his health with his life threatened or terminated, then a claim was prepared for £1,000,000.
24. Winter writes to chief lawyer after the case inviting the council to approach and resolve the adversarial situation; and mend fences, read and not answered.
25. The acting head lawyer replies for the CEO showing Winter the council's code of conduct, advising they should uphold the code, and he found nothing being upheld at all.
26. The same acting lawyer then advises the the CLAIMANTS NOTICE of the claim is interpreted as Winter seeking re-assurance? AND
    
    

    Continues to advise Winter that she would not expect him to experience harassment DURING and WHILE he exercises his rights, MEANING that at all material times when Winter doesn't exercise those rights, he may expect harassment.
    
27. Winter Invites the CEO to resolve this problem or he shall continue to behave adversarially, as he must so do; under the terms defined by the council, on December 22nd 2006 and April / May 2007. in order to avoid future harassment.
    
    
    
    More will be added. This is expected to take months to put here, as each page of serious malfeasant content will be commented upon with scientific, semantic, and logical precision, using nineteen and more disciplines of sound reasoning, and the calculus of logic which shows exactly where and why, the contradictions and contrarieties are INCONTROVERTIBLE and could NOT be denied.
    
28. Winter now makes his case public, in order to protect himself from future harassment, advising the council that the material was reported to two police authorities in October 2006, and the case may still go to court, this time the High Court, in a different construction.
    
    
    But the issues of harassment, malfeasance, and fraud are offences that carry custodial sentencing.
    
29. Winter informs the court that contradictions and contrarieties are incontrovertible 'a priori' laws of thought, noting that if the council brings 1000 lawyers, and 100 Judges none shall be able to controvert the determinations. Correspondence theory under 'a posteriori' empirical determinations in accordance with probability theory,are as faithful and objective and deposed on the council's own paperwork, as incontrovertible evidence.
30. The anniversary invitation to resolve the adversarial exchanges, or they must continue. 11th Dec 2007.
31. The reply from the Chief Executive Office. Presumption of consent that must be.
32. What has to follow in the equilibrium of psychological repression. And logical necessary determinism.
33. At least eight; closed eye, forseeabilities in extenuations while the case unfolds to light, what needs be put to right. Watching time unfold what plighted cunning hides, and who with shame thus derides.
34. Possession Order, and Bailiff enforcement
    
    

    Gives Claimant Multi Million pound property?
    
    

	County Court guidebook by Judge Patricia Pearl Follow this link to read the review of this excellent Small Claims Guidebook. This comprehensive and very accessible guide will take you through the process of suing or defending a claim. This guide will help you take control of your litigation and make you more confident about doing it yourself. Applies to England and Wales

[Medusa]

Here is a link where the ongoing case has similarities......
Biased Adjudas will consider in 21 days whether to award costs against us! - FightBack Forums

[bmwman]

Hi All

Should I now send SARs letter to TEC for any copies of forms they may have regarding this PCN

Many Thanks

	Fight a Motoring Ticket kit Follow this link to read the review of the "Fight a motoring ticket" kit by Lawpack. Everything you need to challenge your motoring ticket. Most motoring tickets go unchallenged. Most which are challenged are challenged successfully.

[Medusa]

I think no need to.
Just a call will answer this, and then do so each 1-2 weeks if worried.
They have bias, but in this specific area, it is indifference, so they will inform you whatever you need over the telephone.

[bmwman]

Hi All

Can anyone tell me if there is a time limit on how long issuing authority has to register a debt after issuing charge notice I know they cannot apply 14 for the statutory 14 days but how about after 8 months.

Many Thanks

[Medusa]

I don't know, perhaps someone else here does, BUT the principle of over 8 months would defeat the EU HR Pr 5 Art 6 , in a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time.
I have three case rulings by NPAS that state over 6 months for issuing a NTO is unreasonable, and ruled upheld when appealed.
SO that is the first chink, the second would be here.
http://www.justice.gov.uk/civil/procrules_fin/contents/parts/part75.htm#rule75_3
look at the keywords, MUST, meaning any breach will be illegal and breach of CPR.

Third the principle of Wednesbury reasonableness is explained here.
And fourth, you still have the questionable basis of the penalty if legal at all.

Finally, the Bill of Rights, My thread at swarb has now 17,000 reads and is invigorated again.
NO MATTER what anyone calls it, any subtraction is the material equivalence of a forfeit, and that entitles you to a fair trial BEFORE subtraction, or forfeiture, or even the latest shade of spin in the same meaning, a civil penalty that is completely ridiculous to argue that it does not belong to the same class as a fine or forfeit, all being of different gravity only.
Hope this helps.

Some of the non-statutory controls are:
.....(a) The Wednesbury principle; Wednesburyunreasonableness
.....(b) Rules of natural justice, see just below.
.....(c) Proportionality (See Teri Oat Estates (P) Ltd. v. Union Territory, Chandigarh11, Union of India v. Rajesh P.U.12, etc.)
.....(d) Promissory estoppel
.....(e) Legitimate expectation

Here, http://www.forceofdestiny.co.uk/Literature/Questor/Logic5.html
and other case law to surround yourself with is here.
http://www.logiclaw.co.uk/arg4dor/caselaw.html

[bmwman]

Hi Medusa

Thank you for the replies very helpful. Could you please answer another question for me. What comes after the charge notice is it an enforcement order.

Many Thanks

Happy New Year

[Medusa]

Have a look here.
http://logiclaw.co.uk/S6T.html
If the council, fails to send you a notice of debt registration, AND an appeal form N244 or similar, to make an appeal, then They again as in schedule 6 breech (breeches at ankles) your human rights. EU HR PR5 AR6.

Getting the proof of that is not easy. Proving omissions that are 'ferrengi' cloaked, need language and procedure in logic that puts them in an inescapable unambiguous contextual inference, that shows the face of mendacity in the course of conduct with utter precision. Many f-lawyers are unable to fathom it, they mainly understand proof not truth. You need to track TEC, and get their written replies. Then watch IF you are treated with the proper forms.

If NOT then the council are doing what they do WIDELY, skip procedures to get at the cash and bully you into submission. I have evidence on this from a large company over many councils. My own case, as I said coming out in days, proved this incontrovertibly and the council was forced to admit in writing what it denied in writing. They hadn't a clue on the 19 disciplines of reasoning I use, and were then invited into a 'caught'.
If patient you will soon read exactly HOW, with probability theory, unambiguous contextual inferencing, and design and purpose principles concluding with wholesale contrarieties and contradictions they climbed into their own hole being told exactly where they were going in advance and not understanding a word of it.
The contradictions were scandalous.

[bmwman]

Hi Medusa

Thank you again for your reply:

Having read through the link you provided to the following

Request 75.3 (1)The authority must file a request in the appropriate form scheduling the amount claimed to be due.
(2)The authority must, in that request or in another manner approved by the court officer
(a)certify –
(i)that 14 days have elapsed since service of the notice of the amount due;
(ii)the date of such service;
(iii)the number of the notice of the amount due; and
(iv)that the amount due remains unpaid;
(b)specify the grounds (whether by reference to the appropriate code or otherwise), as stated in the notice, on which the authority claims to be entitled to claim that amount; and
(c)state –
(i)the name, title and address of the respondent;
(ii)the registration number of the vehicle concerned;
(iii)the authority's address for service;
(iv)the court fee; and
(v)such other matters as required by the practice direction.
(3)On receipt of a request that meets the requirements of paragraphs (1) and (2), the court officer will order that the amount due may be recovered as if it were payable under a county court order by sealing the request and returning it to the authority.
(4)On receipt of a sealed request the authority may draw up an order and must attach to it a form of statutory declaration for the respondent's use.
(5)Within 14 days of receipt of the sealed request, the authority must serve the order (and the form of statutory declaration) on the respondent in accordance with Part 6.
(6)Where an order is served by first class post (or an alternative service which provides for delivery on the next working day) rule 6.7 is modified so that the date of service will be deemed to be the seventh day after the date on which the order was sent to the respondent.



I assume that section 75.3 1,2 a,b,c pertain to the Charge Certificate and sections 4,5,6 pertain to the issueing of the Notice of debt registration.

So looking at the whole time scale.

28/10/2005 issued PCN (Have 28 days to pay according to Statute 29 Days According to PCN)

28/11/2005 Issued NtO (have 28 days to make reps otherwise Charge Certificate issued)

26/01/2006 according to Hastings Charge Certificate Sent (Have 14 days to Pay or Charge registered with County Court TEC (Not registered until 04/09/2006.Should have received notice of debt registration 14 days after plus appeal form. (Not received)

Sorry for the long Post

	County Court guidebook by Judge Patricia Pearl Follow this link to read the review of this excellent Small Claims Guidebook. This comprehensive and very accessible guide will take you through the process of suing or defending a claim. This guide will help you take control of your litigation and make you more confident about doing it yourself. Applies to England and Wales

	Fight a Motoring Ticket kit Follow this link to read the review of the "Fight a motoring ticket" kit by Lawpack. Everything you need to challenge your motoring ticket. Most motoring tickets go unchallenged. Most which are challenged are challenged successfully.

[Medusa]

Be careful, you are not picking up the economic economic semantics.
Anything can be issued anywhere and mean nothing.
YOU are only interested in SERVICE of docs got it!
Proof of omissive techniques in service is complex, and shown in a 700 page case coming out in about 7 days.


2005, Are their PCN's compliant, 2 dates, YOU, and 28 days from? I see you have the same thread at pepipoo, perhaps you should put a link there to here, as readers there will not know your answers here.
These three issues are explained thoroughly at.
http://www.logiclaw.co.uk/Injustice/

The restitution args I think you know, from a link here in £2500 repaid tickets.
http://www.logiclaw.co.uk/AN/AN.html
and http://www.logiclaw.co.uk/JH.html#res


BTW be very careful, the council often use words that imply something else, so I would ask under Freedom of Information Act 20 days free, for them to state clearly when after the debt registration, that form and the appeal was sent on you. Ask it also as a statement of truth. Let us see it. They play on several key words in this, and it escapes normal perception by subliminal embedding in context. I will see what is implied as falsity if there is one.


I think you were not circumspect back in 2005, and should have been checking with TEC THEN. It's very late, but you can download a stat dec from here, page up about a page and the link is there.


http://logiclaw.co.uk/S6T.html#fact


If true, make a stat dec that you never received one. In an attached part or wherever you can insert it.

In the exchanges, if the council refuse the late stat dec, you can ask for the case to be brought to the local CC free.

That is really in essence part of the Bill of Rights; tehy all think of as the Bill o' Frights. if you climbed the hill of attrition, and got here, these rights remain to be had, so that a forfeit takes place AFTER a trial IF you made it up the four hills of mendacity
.
The issues of defective PCN and NTO is surely clear to you, and the time-scale indicates that they were probably not all compliant in every respect.
If the council are going to defend let us see their skeleton args, and especially the statement of truth, they use economic truths that imply falsities, and these will be shown as to how this is done in a several cases last year.
also be aware of the flowchart here.
http://logiclaw.co.uk/flowchart/index.html

	Fight a Motoring Ticket kit Follow this link to read the review of the "Fight a motoring ticket" kit by Lawpack. Everything you need to challenge your motoring ticket. Most motoring tickets go unchallenged. Most which are challenged are challenged successfully.

[bmwman]

Hi Medusa

Thank you Again

Here are to Letters I am going to send 1 to Hastings and one to TEC

Parking Services
Century House
100 Menzies Road
St Leonards on Sea
East Sussex
TN37 9BB Date 01/01/2008

Freedom of Information Act

Dear Sir or Madam

Further to my letter dated 12th September 2007 Ref PCN No XXXXXXXXX could you please confirm to me in writing as a statement of truth the date you served the warrant for recovery from the TEC and supply a copy. You have 20 Days to Comply


The Traffic Enforcement Centre
Northampton County Court Bulk Centre PCN No:
Katharine’s House
21-27 St Katharine’s Street Dated: 01/01/2008
Northampton
NN1 2LH

Dear Sir or Madam

Further to my telephone conversation on the 31/12/2007 could you please confirm in writing to me the following:-

1 The Date of Service of the Charge Certificate.
2 The Charge Certificate Number.
3 The Amount Of the Charge.
4 The grounds (whether by reference to the appropriate code or otherwise), as stated in the notice, on which the authority claims to be entitled to claim that amount.
5 The Date Hastings Borough Council registered this PCN with you as a debt.
6 The Date the Warrant was approved.




Yours Faithfully

What do you Think

[Medusa]

Check back at the CPR you pasted above and ask what you know must be done by the council, and wht you want to know also, teh council will have a complete log of every PCN with its history on their database..
The council should be dates of; as above,

drawing up an order and must attach to it a form of statutory declaration for the respondent
and

THIS DATE ----- the authority must serve 1 - the order (and 2 - the form of statutory declaration)

TEC will only have the dates of request, and sealing it, plus debt registration and the rest is up to the council.

BUT download a n244, asap and email it back to TEC. Call them even.

	Fight a Motoring Ticket kit Follow this link to read the review of the "Fight a motoring ticket" kit by Lawpack. Everything you need to challenge your motoring ticket. Most motoring tickets go unchallenged. Most which are challenged are challenged successfully.

[bmwman]

Hi Medusa

Change letter to enforcement order

[bmwman]

Hi All

Although this PCN was paid to a collection company. Can I still enter a Stat Dec PE3 On the grounds that I did not receive the enforcement order and appeal form. Then N244 if Hastings refuse Stat Dec.

	Fight a Motoring Ticket kit Follow this link to read the review of the "Fight a motoring ticket" kit by Lawpack. Everything you need to challenge your motoring ticket. Most motoring tickets go unchallenged. Most which are challenged are challenged successfully.

[Medusa]

Nothing stops you pursuing it back, except it becomes a steep climb from the point you paid.
The council argues that IF you paid THEN you consented.
This argument is farcical and untenable, But watch the forces at play.
The council argues that IF you paid THEN you consented.
This argument is farcical, and untenable.

You paid under duress, and under increasing pressure of charges being imposed to continue enforcement and increase vexation and detriment. you more.
They will stick to their argument; ignoring yours, and unless you have a clear non compliance to engage under court rules, you MAY have to put it down to experience.

The forms P3 and N244, may continue the procedure, and if they refuse the late stat dec, then it should come to a local court free. That local court may, decide to wear blinkers, and ONLY consider the Out of Time (OoT) Stat dec on its merit, and then they may refuse the OoT. Yuo would get a hearing to argue.

To refuse an OoT is to refuse a late declaration that is designed precisely for THAT purpose of being an OoT, and that is a 'contradico in adiecto'. A very bad ruling that shows you the court is leaning and not impartial. It varies from court to court and Judge to Judge!

Beyond that you are not in uncharted territory, but it gets tougher the more the establishment (.gov.uk) defends its position, and you will see the forces of reaction coming into play, unless the court behaves like others and sends you and the council out to sort it out between yourselves. This is at least a denotation of impartiality.

The semantic game, and the critical path games are now in motion, and each stage will have its surprises.
Take a look at http://www.twtanb.co.uk
case 2, where the court decided to ignore the late stat dec, dismissing hte case.......
I can tell you the council DESPITE the MOTORIST NEVER having committed any contravention in the first place. AND EVEN IF HE had, the LINES at that location were non complaint, the council still pursued him remorselessly with what can be best described as a sense of evil. That council is named there, and are notorious for this. It is the same council that is being placed on hte web next week, to give insight to the degree to which they break many many alws to enforce ONE.
His case will be opened to all soon to learn what a kind of creature we are all dealing with here.
The course is lengthy, the decision yours..

[bmwman]

Hi Medusa

It is my intention to get these cr**ks in to court and try to expose them for what they are? Every ones help and advise in this would be very much appriciated. I do not want to send any forms of yet untils I have all the information I need. Although I have down loaded them (PE3 and N244)

I would like to start creating a Court Bundle do you know of any templates for this. Also should I Send Hastings a second letter requesting full re-embersment in the form of Letter befor Action or just hit them blind.

[Medusa]

I have details of the
Poole council.
Southend on Sea case. RRR
The Bexley case, RRR
Hillngdon coming soon.
3 cases in CLCC being currently release next few dasys....
Thse marked R are repaid restitution cases.
Bexley

Logic Reasoning Thought Laws

Southend
Logic Reasoning Thought Laws

Loads of useful statutes here,
http://www.logiclaw.co.uk/Acts/acts.html and case law snippets (courtesy of Trevor Nunn) here. http://www.logiclaw.co.uk/arg4dor/caselaw.html


Wayne Pendle DVLA case if wanted.
Templates,
http://www.logiclaw.co.uk/arg4dor/TemplateLetters.html

[bmwman]

Hello Every One

Received a reply to my FIO letter from Hasting today.





What do you make of this