This bullying, harrasement and licence to print money has to stop!!

[Fabracaz1]

Hello
and I hope this is the first step in getting something done about stopping the cash cow for local councils that is the issuing of pcn,s and the complete and utter contempt they show to anybody that challenges them.

To cut a long story short between mid may and mid june of last year my car was captured on CCTV SEVENTEEN TIMES!! presumably parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours. After checking the rules on Westminster Councils website I am sure that all of these where incorrectly issued!

Despite writing to the council ( by special delivery ) on 3 occasions surprise surprise I have received no reply.

In some instances I have received no paperwork from the council or the traffic enforcement centre. The first point of contact being a threatening letter from a bailiff! On calling them they are as about as helpful as a ashtray on a motorbike!

I have even sent all the information to PATAS and a month later I still I have heard nothing from them.

How are they allowed to get away with this bullying and complete contempt to motorists!!

Ideally I would like to know if there is a central source or individual that can freeze all these pcn,s and make the council accountable for there shoddy administration rather than continue with the exasperating process of continually writing letters and making phonecalls to all of sundry with absoloutley no evidence in return thatsomebody is looking into the bloody mess!!

I look forward to any advice anybody has.

[adamna]

I feel just like you, and after a year and a half battling with 'the system' that doesn't respond to letters properly, if at all, I believe I may be about to hear some good news. If I do I will use it to do just that, stop the bullying and harassment on all our behalves.
Unfortunately it looks like this will just be the beginning of the next long battle, and I will need plenty of stamina, but it is one worth fighting. As a friend recently said, we need the same weapons to defend ourselves as they use to attack us. Wouldn't that be nice?

I believe I have Transport for London, at the highest level, proved to be acting illegally. Will they refund everyone affected?

I will post again when I have more news, at the moment it is back with TfL for some interesting answers to interesting questions from PATAS.

[Fabracaz1]

That sounds very interesting.

It just goes to show you how corrupt inept and inefficent the system is.

I was informed by PATSAS yesterday that Westminster Council have recinded one of the tickets! Thats nice of them!

However, considering fourteen of the others are of the same offence why have some of the others been sent to bailiffs and not also recinded!!

The mind boggles!!!!!!!!!!!!

Anyway I look forward to hearing more from you Adamna as this has really got to stop!!

Ive actually submitted a petition to the downing street website. As of this moment I am still waiting for it to go live!!

I will update this post as and when I know more.

[adamna]

For the time being, we have to keep banging on at them, of course all your other PCN's should be overturned too if they were given in the same circumstance.
My lastest idea, apart from refunding everyone similarly affected (or offering to reconsider their representations ), is to demand that all issuers of PCN's fund a resource to help the receivers that has educated informed advice from professionals who know the ins and outs of the system. And include the contact details for it on every PCN. They can afford it after all.
It has taken me around 500 hours to research the law and deal with my case, no-one should have to go through this. Forums are all very well, and a fantastic resource, but when you are in trouble, you need fast responsible advice, and I couldn't find any .

Today's news:
Peter Hain thinks it's reasonable to ask to get away with 'making mistakes' over fairly large sums of money, so why can't we over a few quid or a few minutes? It's definitely one rule for them, and quite another for us, yet they are supposed to be there for our benefit.
New parking fines introduced to make life even worse, new permission to be given a ticket even if you've left the scene of the 'crime' on 'safety grounds' as driving away quickly to avoid it could be 'dangerous'. Yes, very dangerous, they might miss out on some of our money.

[green_and_mean]

Originally Posted by adamna

is to demand that all issuers of PCN's fund a resource to help the receivers that has educated informed advice from professionals who know the ins and outs of the system. And include the contact details for it on every PCN. They can afford it after all.

The Councils do fund the appeals process and both NPAS and PATAS have good websites explaining the process. Do you propose the police also fund evening classes on how to escape speeding fines or maybe Tesco pays for shoplifters to go to law school? The laws are clearly set out and available online as is the highway code. The Citizens advice can also give impartial advice for those that require it.

[adamna]

The appeals process is restricted to considering restricted 'points of law' under very narrow terms. They do not have a mandate to apply discretion. Most issuers of PCN's flaunt the legal requirement to exercise their discretion, not so surprising as if they do, they lose money! green_and_mean, you seem to assume guilt, just like they do! What if you are not guilty? If you are wrongly accused of shoplifting you get to stand in front of a judge (or magistrate) and give your side of the story. Decriminalised fines took all that away - that is why they are unique in the history of this country. Part of my issue is exactly that they do not explain the process sufficiently, though they were directed to do so by the Court of Appeal in 2005. Unfortunately Citizens Advice know very little beyond standard procedures, and struggle to accommodate the customers they have already. We do not come in neat standard packages (though they are recyclable) and problems arise when they (the authorities) do not do their job properly - it is almost impossible to make them attend to mistakes, and a high degree of personal suffering is endured in the process. If it were all so easy, I take it as an insult that it has taken me so many hours to deal with my case. I am not stupid.

I have not given details as for the time being I prefer not to give too much information, until I get a final decision. As I said at the outset, I expect it to be fairly earth shattering, and music to the ears of thousands who have suffered appalling harassment quite needlessly.

I am proposing that there be somewhere to go for advice that actually knows what they are talking about in relation to PCN’s. It does not currently exist, and there are untold thousands affected by a relatively new system set up, not to make life better for road users, (not just motorists) but to increase revenue. I think this is generally accepted as the real motive, to argue otherwise would surely be futile. Follow the money, there's lots of it!

[green_and_mean]

Its a popular misconception that DPE assumes guilt it does not. A LA accuses you of a contravention you then have to defend yourself and prove otherwise, if you don't bother of course you will be judged 'guilty'. If I was accused of shoplifting and did not bother defending my case I would be assumed guilty and sentenced. Where is the difference? Do you seriously think scrapping PCNs and FPNs and send every single parking case to trial would serve any purpose other than fill the pockets of lawyers?
Judges and Magistrates do not have discretion in guilty and not guilty descisions. If going back to the shop lifting scenario Tesco accused me of shop lifting I admitted guilt but said it was because I had fallen on hard times I would still have been found guilty the court has no other choice, its only the sentence that is variable due to discretion. The 1991 RTA does not give the option of variable fines it would make the system unworkable and unfair.
If you parked on a unlawfully marked restriction that was still obviously a restriction ie a DYL with no T bar, you would be very upset it discretion and common sense was used and it was decided that you still should have known not to park and got found 'guilty' the law can be and is used both ways.
A huge amount of appeals get upheld by Councils at the informal stage but unfortunatly like in most things in life those that get off do not set up forums praising generous Councils, its the unhappy minority that have the biggest voice.

[seanamarts]

How can you expect Joe Public to adhere to 'The rules' when councils break them constantly by not following the rules and regulations that are set out by the government.

[electron99]

Originally Posted by green_and_mean

Its a popular misconception that DPE assumes guilt it does not. A LA accuses you of a contravention you then have to defend yourself and prove otherwise, if you don't bother of course you will be judged 'guilty'. If I was accused of shoplifting and did not bother defending my case I would be assumed guilty and sentenced. Where is the difference? Do you seriously think scrapping PCNs and FPNs and send every single parking case to trial would serve any purpose other than fill the pockets of lawyers?
Judges and Magistrates do not have discretion in guilty and not guilty descisions. If going back to the shop lifting scenario Tesco accused me of shop lifting I admitted guilt but said it was because I had fallen on hard times I would still have been found guilty the court has no other choice, its only the sentence that is variable due to discretion. The 1991 RTA does not give the option of variable fines it would make the system unworkable and unfair.
If you parked on a unlawfully marked restriction that was still obviously a restriction ie a DYL with no T bar, you would be very upset it discretion and common sense was used and it was decided that you still should have known not to park and got found 'guilty' the law can be and is used both ways.
A huge amount of appeals get upheld by Councils at the informal stage but unfortunatly like in most things in life those that get off do not set up forums praising generous Councils, its the unhappy minority that have the biggest voice.

If you are caught shoplifting, you are presumed innocent until a court proves you otherwise.With a PCN/FPN you are judged guilty, and then issued with a fine/charge, often before you are aware of what has happened.You then have to prove you are innocent.The vast majority of people are law abiding, and would not think of challenging a parking fine, in the same way they would not think of challenging the instructions of a policeman.Sadly local authorities continually run slipshod over the exact letter of the law in a bid to generate maximum income.
Remember authority can only enforce laws with the will and agreement of the people.Look at what happened after the last poll tax riots.This latest parking legislation takes us one step nearer to motorists taking to the streets saying enough is enough.

[bmwman]

I agree with seanamarts joe public is required to abide by the rules if they dont they get punished. Yet if local councils break the rules they get of scott free. As to the new scheme thats been on the news i think this will be a farce as councils still cannot get the currant scheme right.
Its just a form of legalized fraud. Just like the cost of petrol

[green_and_mean]

Originally Posted by electron99

If you are caught shoplifting, you are presumed innocent until a court proves you otherwise.With a PCN/FPN you are judged guilty, and then issued with a fine/charge, often before you are aware of what has happened.You then have to prove you are innocent.

You are NOT presumed guilty on the issue of a PCN anymore than you used to be on a summons for Traffics offences in the past. You either plead guilty through the post or elect to challenge it in Court. The choice of appealing the PCN has not been removed you just elect to go to appeal rather than magistrates court. The fact that a majority of recipients of PCNs realise they parked in contravention and just pay does not mean the system is flawed. The rate of appeals upheld by NPAS/PATAS is around 50% which shows that it is a fair system.
All this talk of Council corruption is absolute rubbish Councils make mistakes and for the motorist that can be bothered this works in their favour.
Trying to make out Councils miss off T bars to trick drivers into parking in contravention is laughable. How many drivers seriously park on a yellow line thinking its ok to park because the T bar half a mile down the street is missing?? The 2 date issue was due to a different interpretation of the law and wrong guideance given to LAs. I cannot fathom out why anyone would consider Councils actually went out of their way to issue PCNs with one date to confuse drivers who parked and got tickets around midnight because they are the only PCNs affected, its laughable.
I park on a Bus Stop and get a ticket with one date on I consider myself to be lucky and use it to get off, I wouldn't start a one man campaign about Council corruption issuing dodgy PCNs, I did after all park on a Bus Stop which having passed my driving test I'm fully aware is against the law, the thought of getting a dodgy worded PCN did not affect my choice of parking place.
I once went to Court for driving at 120 mph on the A3 the Police made an error in their evidence and I got myself off. Does this make the Police corrupt taking me to Court? I was fully aware at the time of my speed and if found guilty would have been man enough to take the punishment.

[adamna]

green_and_mean you assume too much. What if you do defend yourself, but your defence is ignored, either 'not received' or just plain ignored. The process is a steamroller that cannot be stopped. I drive far more than I shop, and I genuinely try to abide by the regulations. Sometimes it is not easy, and no sensible person wants a PCN. We now have a situation where people won't make way for emergency vehicles if it means entering a bus lane because CCTV with no common sense will record them - how crazy is that?

elcctron99 is quite right, the presumption of innocence has gone down the pan, and it is an important right that we need to keep. These are not piffling fines, and they too easily escalate out of all proportion to the offence, far greater than any given for shoplifting which is an intent to take what is not yours, not an intent to use what is.
I think you would need to have had personal experience of the difficulties to have due sympathy, those that have are not necessarily as you paint them. Perhaps people have used things like T bars and incorrectly worded tickets as semantics because they are fed up with semantics being used against them. A war was declared against us, in the absence of reason any legal weapon is valid I'm afraid.

The terminology 'getting off' also assumes guilt, if you were innocent it is the accuser that 'gets off'. There is no scope for punishment, or even compensation from those that impose a draconian system upon us. If they carry on getting away with this it's an open door to things that may affect you! (First they came for the motorists...)

A huge amount of appeals get upheld by Councils

There are no statistics for why they are upheld, are they being fair and reasonable, or are too many PCN's being issued wrongly? A 'huge amount' do not get upheld, but in every case someone has taken the time to challenge the accusation and the fine. How many would do this without feeling that they had good grounds? We don't know do we? A 'huge amount' go on to a formal appeal, where another 'huge amount' are overturned. There are all too many 'huge amounts' here for trivial 'offences' like having and inch of a vehicle over a fabricated line (that may not even accommodate a vehicle) using up time and resources that would be better spent on things that matter.

Councils make mistakes and for the motorist that can be bothered this works in their favour.

NOT ALWAYS!!!!! You don't seem to understand.

The difference between you and I is that you have broken the law and 'got off' on a technicality. I haven't, nor do I wish to, I just want the law applied correctly.

Yes it takes time and effort to be fair. Your point is????

[seanamarts]

G&M if councils deliberately ignore the regulations that are set out by the government, it is corruption for what ever gains, we can accept the odd mistake, but making the same mistakes over and over again by the same people in the same departments are not acceptable. The councils are responsible for their actions and they must also abide by the law, which most if not all in one way or another dont.


corruption
noun

1. Degrading, immoral acts or habits:
2. Departure from what is legally, ethically, and morally correct:
3. A term that offends against established usage standards:
   

[green_and_mean]

Originally Posted by seanamarts

G&M if councils deliberately ignore the regulations that are set out by the government, it is corruption for what ever gains, we can accept the odd mistake, but making the same mistakes over and over again by the same people in the same departments are not acceptable. The councils are responsible for their actions and they must also abide by the law, which most if not all in one way or another dont.

In most cases mistakes are through incompetance or ignorance not corruption. Cases are won and lost at adjudication every day by numerous Councils. These cases are not read by Council officials unless involved in the case or its highlighted as a key case in quarterly news letters. Interpretations of the law happen every week Councils cannot just change policy oh a whim. The vast majority of Parking managers think what they are doing is compliant with the law.
Lets say for example you as a driver consider all timeplates should be on roadside posts painted grey and win an appeal in Cambridge on this point. A parking manager in Brighton is not going to read the case and rush out and order the entire towns posts get repainted the next day or order enforcement postponed until further notice. He will have to seek clarification from central govt. NPAS etc which is not going to be an overnight thing, then seek approval from above if its needed to carry out the changes.

[adamna]

Originally Posted by green_and_mean

In most cases mistakes are through incompetance or ignorance not corruption. ....These cases are not read by Council officials unless involved in the case or its highlighted as a key case in quarterly news letters..... The vast majority of Parking managers think what they are doing is compliant with the law.

It is the paid job of Parking Managers to know the law and to apply it correctly. If they make a mistake, the least they could do is apologise, not send in the bailiffs.

It is not my paid job to prove them wrong. It is not my paid job to be running to the Court to get Statutory Declarations sworn within strict time limits in response to what their computer spits out. It is not my paid job to write letters that they 'don't have to' read.

How do you know what is in the mind of these people? They don't care until they are made to care. Even then, when they are told by a court to change, and they decide not to, it is corruption. Legally, morally and ethically corrupt.

[green_and_mean]

Originally Posted by adamna