Has Anyone Reclaimed Paid PCN

[bmwman]

Hi All

Very sceptical about authentisity of "Order for Recovery of Unpaid Penalty Charges" Notice dated 02/09/2006.

The reasons for my scepticism is that when I for tried to get a copy of the Notice of Debt Registration which apparently turns out to be the above. I was told by a member of parking services that they had been instructed not send out copies as they had Date as Postmark on them. Secondly it is Not signed.





This is ment to be a copy

How ever looking at the Charge Certficate





It is marked Copy with date sent and signed.
Your Comments would be Appreciated

[green_and_mean]

The letter with the date on does not need 'date sent' written on it as it has the date printed on it, where as the second letter does not, it is on 'as post mark'.

[bmwman]

"ok" ignore the hand written date when was it posted

[bmwman]

green_and_mean look at the charge certificate there are two dates on it the date the NtO was sent and the date the PCN was issued. I do not have the envelope any longer ignore the hand written date "when was it sent". For all I know it could have been sent anytime between the 26/11/2006 and the date debt of registration 04/09/2006.

As for your comment on the signature "ps It isn't signed because its not the original its a copy, you would have been sent the original" If thats the case then they sent me the original charge certificate on the 27/12/2007 as it is signed. In which case who sent and where from.

	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.

[green_and_mean]

Sorry you have totally lost me with your argument with all the dates etc its a little bit confusing what point you are trying to make? I thought the original claim was the PCN was invalid but now you seem to be confusing the matter with arguments over whether copies of letters need to be signed etc?

	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 green_and_mean

the point I am trying to make is looking at the whole process from PCN to Order for Recovery.

List of Faults

PCN

Only one date, You are Therefore, within 28 Days, NtO and Payment Address only on tear off slip

NtO

No date of contravention, Other wording also incorrect.

Charge Certificate

No date of issue, no date of contravention and other wording incorrect

Order for Recovery

Not Received, 8 Months to Debt Registration at TEC, ? authentisity of Copied Order for Recovery, No signature.

It would appear to me that the whole process in this case and many others is unlawfull.

	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]

Sorry I have been involved elsewhere a few days.
From memory; and please confirm each stage with TEC by telephone.
Their tel nrs are on the
law, logic,reasoning, truth, falsity, perjury, mendacity, knowledge, belief, cases are Amtrak, Telewest, Met Police, Landlords, bank, CPS, retailers, formal calculus of logic, syllogisms, Shakespeare, Aristotle, Plato, Russell and others. Winter V Ro

left menu, nav bar item Charge certificates topb nav item bottom selection.

A tec fact sheet should be there also.

The moment you file a P3 or N244, stat dec, / late stat dec, all enforcement action MUST cease – legally, ie; if a bailiff comes in then tell him the action is registered at TEC, and to go away, NO walking possessions etc. Also advise him if he does breach the law, it will lbe noted, and he too will be brought to court. They try to bully.

Remember also that the council WILL have filed a statement of truth under their 'global' statements. Thse truths are some of those I mentioned of interest at the next stage. BUT remember again, the sworn truth is the one I will be happy to exammine and point any impLIED falsities in and how to treat them.


The 'elected' council has some 14-21 days to respond, accept or reject. If accepted, then it ceases, or they may pursue it later, unless you get from TEC a copy of the cessation.


If rejected then beware you have a short time window of legal opportunity for the council to engage in enforcement.


Assuming the latter, this can be about 5-7 days IF you are monitoring and get your request for the transfer in fast. TEC will not accept a request for transfer to the local CC beforehand, so it's best to be in touch daily by email as the days close in, or if a Bailiff comes then advise the action IS being requested for transfer to the local CC, and ask him to leave.
Have a copy of an EMAILS from TEC to hand.


At that point when TEC accept the request for transfer all action goes back on hold, enforcement will again be illegal.


You will have made a determination by this time of the vigour of enforcement, and where the actions are based on say an illegal procedure, non compliant papers, or even non contravention. Then you will begin to see the public relations and government agitprop inclinations come in to play.


The case should be transferred to the county court, monitor it.

Remember the entire SCHEME is full of potential for derogation in omissions, IF you make omissions then you give them the upper hand, if not you will find that they will sometimes, all too frequently make omissions that are to their advantage, nicely labelled minor admin errors.


At the court hearing, a judge, depending on his integrity will either rule an out of time declaration OoT, “out of time”, amazingly the reason for an OoT is to be able to file OoT and then be told it's OoT. that will be a judge who has taken instructions, or is making a ruling that is inherently inconsistent with paperwork or he will seek some CPR to use a a pretext for his decision. The system is hardened if there is potential floodgate in your request, not wanting the system of RTA SCHEMS for subtractions to fail by one jot, or to have the court clogged or face multiple claims. This is of course for you to JUDGE the JUDGE on what he is actually doing behind the mask of CPR.


If you post a question on my INSIGHT thread, where relevant to any court procedure, that is where, some four cases that have come to court through various routes, is expected how that system is managed, masked and choreographed, and remarkably those judges observed were overtly cordial covering a stony core.

Those whose rulings were clearly in breach of CPR 1.1-1.4, AND self mis directed in virtue of selective biased paperwork were written to that their conduct was observed, how it was understood the system was patently managed and those insights will be ocming on that INSIGHT thread.

At that stage, conjecturally perhaps, if the forces of reaction in NLP, denial, admit nothing deny everything, and PR renamed from brainwashing, are still in vigour the system will have mounted an argument that the case cannot be ruled in a county court, only a High court.

There are many counter arguments to this, that are valid, but there is a ruling that is HIGHLY fallacious and self confuting that manages the system so that you have to then go to a High Court. OR LOW court whichever viewpoint you have.


As Bird, or Bremner says, imitating Bush, with respect to a fair and public hearing for the Guantanamo bay detainees.


“Yep, first we give them a fair and public hearing, THEN we murder them”

	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

	Are you letting your bank keep your money Are you giving away thousands of pounds?? Many people aren't claiming all of the money they are entitled to when they make their bank charges claims. You have been forced to pay unfair bank charges. Have you forgotten that your bank has charged you inteest on those charges? If you are overdrawn and the bank owes you charges - then your overdraft is made up of charges - money which you bank owes you. Yet you are paying interest to the bank - on your own money!!! Follow this link to see the discussions on this. You might even double th size of your claim.

[bmwman]

Hi Medusa

Thank you for your reply.

I think I may have inadvertantly confused you I am looking to seek restitution on a PCN already paid to Hastings Agents (CCS Enforcement)

I you have time take a look at the PCN, NtO, Charge Certificate and Notice of Debt Registration.

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]

Sorry in that case
Take a close look at
http://www.logiclaw.co.uk/JH.html
and
http://www.logiclaw.co.uk/AN/AN.html
These were succesful cases, Southend on Sea £100? and Bexley £2500.

And note that there is a case opened in the High Court, that is sub judice at present.

[bmwman]

Hi Medusa

Can this still be taken back through the PE3 stat dec then N244 to local county court as I did not receive the Notice of Debt Registration / Order for Recovery.

Many Thanks

	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]

YES, Call TEC, download a form, and file it asap. Itis explained on the link I gave at
law, logic,reasoning, truth, falsity, perjury, mendacity, knowledge, belief, cases are Amtrak, Telewest, Met Police, Landlords, bank, CPS, retailers, formal calculus of logic, syllogisms, Shakespeare, Aristotle, Plato, Russell and others. Winter V Ro

top left nav bar, charge certs etc out of the blue.

A late stat dec IS SUPPOSED TO BE PRECISELY for a late stat dec, but watch for the fun!!!!!!
The sworn statement from the council, will have meaning as you get closer to it.

[bmwman]

Hi Medusa

Again thank you for your reply

Now have just about all the evidence I need so looking to file PE3 on Wednesday.
Will this be OK for the PE3

I did not receive a copy of the Notice of Debt Registration and Appeal Form PE2 this breaches my human rights under EU HR PR5 AR6 and Civil Procedure Rule 75.3

Many Thanks

[Medusa]

First, thanks for the pm of which part I enclose here for ALL people who fiull in forms that are ring fenced options leading ONLY to selective and biased options that lead to hasty generalistaions that are FLAWED.

Thanks also for helping others further down the line, I am involved in higher level cases at present.

People who file forms like above should add something like the4 comment below to ALLOW for WHOLE TRUTH, and NOT just biased selctions that conform the the lowered standards of proof to convict more easily.????? Remember Blair and terrorism, THIS IS NOT terrorism.


V
PM Looks fine.
Just perhaps a final comment.
Please note that forms requiring just ticks to boxes, are generally far too restricted and encompass the principles of economic truth rather than WHOLE truth, the former allowing for prejudicial selection of biased samples to reach hasty generalisations. Therefore I apologise if there is an element of non conformity, but when swearing truth I choose to swear the WHOLE truth rather than those truths that focus on biased selections.

[bmwman]

Hi All

A special thanks to Medusa for you help so far.

Can anyone tell me if the Stat Dec forms them selves have to be in a pacific format or can councils mess about with them to suit there own needs.

Many Thanks

[bmwman]

Hi All

Well it seems I have just answered my own question. It seems to me that council parking services will do just about anything to screw you.

I have just looked at the copy of the Statutory Declaration - Unpaid Penalty Charge PE3 Hastings provided from my SARs letter. See below



Reading throught the notes I find.

On the Statutory Declaration you must indicate why you are appealing against the Order for Recovery. You must tick one of the three grounds which are listed on the Statutory Declaration. The TEC will be unable to process your application if one of the three grounds has not been indicated. The TEC will be unable to process your application if the grounds have been altered in any way. If your case relates to a London Borough Parking contravention you must only tick one box. If none of the three grounds apply please contact the local authority directly as the TEC are unable to assist you.

Looking at the original from TEC the first of the three option for appeal is

I did re I did not receive the:
Notice to Owner (Parking contravention) or
Enforcement Notice (Bus lane contravention) or
Penalty Charge Notice (Moving Traffic contravention or Congestion Charging contravention)

Also look at who the Applicant is. This adds further doubt to there authentisity and I suspect breaches the data protection act.

[Medusa]

It's a ring fenced selection set arguMEANT.

Once you see that, the ONLY way you can swear a statement of truth that gets around it, is to RAISE the standards of proof, (remember they lowered them to get convictions much more easily? Done with boxed in selection sets).

They use something like swear to tell the truth and nothing BUT.

Read this stanza that's at logic law and has been around and there for some ten yrs.

'Truth the Whole truth and Nothing but..', is best,
While 'Truth and Nothing but..', leaves out the rest.
Stealthy lawyers; by close selection sets,
Present persuasive cases like cadets,
(poor cadets at that).

They are interested in economic ECONOMIC truth; line two, not whole truth; line one, I hope that is clear.

Go to my INSIGHT thread, last post, where it begins, and use that or a modified phrase.

I cannot swear a truth that is alone an economic truth, and hence is based on insufficient sample AND OR biased selection of such a sample, doing so implies a hidden fault, (culpa lata) and I cannot be deceitful, the Council may be, but not me.

Remember IF you are to swear an oath for them, rather than swear an oath at them, then your oath needs to be of higher standard then theirs.
Then ask them to swear a statement of truth, and let me see it.

You will see on the Insight thread, how TWO simple words were enough to show perjury in a court, coming later on that thread.

if you have to tick one box, do so, and refer it to an additional comment, that way you conform to a rule, and add to it whole truth.

Stand back from the trees they want you in, and look at the wood.

[bmwman]

Hi All

Have now sorted Stat Decs here's the PE3

On the 28/10/2005 a notice was placed on my car that was purported to be a Penalty charge Notice.Under the Road Traffic Act 1991 Section 66,3. Penalty Charge Notice’s must specify pacific information. On closer inspection of the purported PCN it seems to me that it fails on 5 of the 6 required elements these being Section 66 (3a), (3c), (3d), (3e) and (3f) thus rendering the Penalty Charge Notice a nullity thus no liability was
triggered. I therefore request either full restitution in full of the
monies (£325.87 plus interest at 8% as allowed by the County Court)
paid through a mistake in law to Hastings Borough Councils agents
CCS Enforcement on the 20th February 2007 or passing to my local
County Court or a formal hearing.
Please note that forms requiring just ticks to boxes, are generally
far too restricted and encompass the principles of economic
truth rather than WHOLE truth, the former allowing for
prejudicial selection of biased samples to reach hasty
generalisations. Therefore I apologise if there is an element
of non conformity,
I cannot swear a truth that is alone an economic truth, and hence is based on insufficient sample AND OR biased selection of such a
sample, doing so implies a hidden fault, (culpa lata)
and I cannot be deceitful, the Council may be, but I am not.

And Here's the PE2

My reasons for filing the Statutory Declaration outside the given time are as follows: (Please give full details).
(Do not give your reasons for appeal against the original penalty charge on this form).
I did not receive a copy of the Notice of Debt Registration and Appeal Form PE2.
I suggest it looks remarkably like, this breaches my human rights under
EU HR PR5 AR6 and Civil Procedure Rule 75.3. Please ask the council to
provide a sworn statement of truth, that it complied with CPR 75.3 AND
give PARTICULARS of when and how it sent the debt registration and appeal form
to myself and that the copies I requested under the data protection act are true
and accurate copies. Should the council reject my appeal, then please arrange to
transfer the case to a local County Court.
Please note that forms requiring just ticks to boxes, are generally
far too restricted and encompass the principles of economic
truth rather than WHOLE truth, the former allowing for
prejudicial selection of biased samples to reach hasty generalisations. Therefore I apologise if there is an element of non conformity,
I cannot swear a truth that is alone an economic truth, and
hence is based on insufficient sample AND OR biased selection of
such a sample, doing so implies a hidden fault, (culpa lata) and I
cannot be deceitful, the Council may be, but I am not.

A Special Thank You to Medusa for his assistants with these

[Medusa]

Just a note,


Suggestions,
could read;


Mistake of Fact and OR Mistake of Law,
and Under the Statute of Limitations Act 1980


( Actually this can extend beyond 6 yrs in special cases, I have a Lords Ruling in the matter.)

Also 'culpa lata' is the short form for 'culpa lata dolo adquiparatur.'
means various things like

Gross negligence is equal to fraud.

Gross negligence is equivalent to deceit.

Perhaps add further something like,


As I consider myself a law abiding and honourable citizen, with integrity, I prefer to RAISE the standards of truth, than lower them,


I do hope other parties in this case can follow that example.

Now get ready to observe with added purpose, the profile, and faces of mendacity on the darker sides of human nature, where material things are considered of higher value than the spiritual ones.

[bmwman]

Hi Medusa

Thank you for the reply
I read the following this evening
Mistake of Fact and OR Mistake of Law,
and Under the Statute of Limitations Act 1980

Very very interesting. I may need a little help in compiling my case against Hastings if you are willing and have the time.

Many Thanks

[bmwman]

Hi All

Well started to put my case together and have come across something interesting it seems that there are NO percific quide lines at the wording of the Notice of Debt Registration or the actual Order for Recovery cna anyone tell me otherwise and if there are where I can find them

Many thanks