Jump to content

nero12

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    1,003
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

184 Excellent

1 Follower

About nero12

  • Rank
    Classic Account Holder
  1. This is called a ghoster , silly CEO. The way round this is to send something similar to this adding whatever else you need to go with it Dear Sir / Madam, I write to inform you that until I received this Notice to Owner I wasunaware that a Penalty Charge Notice had been issued to the vehicle for which Iam the Registered Keeper. A Penalty Charge Notice was never handed to me ,attached to the vehicle or sent through the post and is therefore a procedural impropriety. then your bit regarding the contravntion and signage and the CEO was not prevented
  2. Had a recent one from here where the CEO was telling porkies. What you have is a ghoster -- which is more common than you think His pocket book notes can normally give the game away. Agreed about the scan -- can we see this more clearly please. Yes jamberson is correct Redbridge reject even if you are legally parked so throw the kitchen sink at this one.
  3. But YOU can -- make an application to recover your reciprocal costs at £9.25 per hour following the 'no contest' by the authority. 4 or 5 hours at formal stage is not unreasonable to claim plus postage. There are a few case numbers to use which you can find on the PATAS website Can we see the new tickets please just to see if anything has changed.
  4. If this is for a reg 10 PCN --IE issued via cctv then you have to go formal as thess act as the nto Can you let us know what you went in with and how many times you have written
  5. Authorities have 56 days fromn the date they recieve representations to offer a response. If they fail to respond they are deemed to have accepted that the contravention has not occured. Is this your second go at the formal stage
  6. What area are we talking about ?? Why do you think the CEO has committed a fraud ??
  7. When you go formal with this You need to ge the contemporaneous notes the CEO made at the scene -- the photos and a copy of the traffic order for that area persuant to 6 to 18 of the traffic orders procedures 1996 so you can make a decent judgement as to where to go next. Did they not respond to your informal appeal ?? Sorry i havt read all of this !
  8. Nice one mate -- any chance we could have the case number for this -- it may help others in the same predicament. (they should have taken the 50 quid , what a bunch of wallies LOL)
  9. Seeing as CEO's do not have the powers of detention the last time I checked this CEO in this particualr instance has indeed got off light -- the kind police man could well have charged the guy with a public order offence section 5 possibly , which inturn would have got him the sack. If we are to believe the OP there are atleast 2 witnesses to this Unless someone wishes to deffend this course of action --
  10. For a CEO to grab a member of the public and attempt to hold that person against thier will is against the law --- he has absolutely no right to do so. The operationla guidance is quite clear -- if there has been a crime then there is a duty to report --nothing more. IMV this person got off light
  11. My copy of Part two of this NTO has similar deffects with regard to the time frames - it also fails on other issues. Part 2 documentaion defective - flawed time frames (again) NTO does not comply with section 66 (3) © Of the RTA 1991. On blue section 'You Must Not Ignore this Notice' and section 'Notes for Completion' It specifically states in order of the above 'within 28 days you must either pay this notice or make representations to the council' 'If neither payment or representations have been received within 28 days of you receiving this notice to owner'
  12. Hammersmith are having a laugh with this, you cant possibly be expected to remember what happened in detail nearly 4 years after the event. I think there was a tribunal on this --Davis v Kensington and Chelsea --reasonable period of time I recon they wont have a true copy of this PCN nor the notes made by the parking attendant, which may win this persuant to Chase vs Westminster
  13. HI mate this is indeed a Notice to owner , under no circumstances do you wait for the 'fine' to go up. I have a hunch that there isnt any proof by way of photographic evidence in which case the CEO should have made some sort of diagram in his pocket book notes, I could well be wrong though. What is certain is the fact that you appealed informally as per procedure -- they have aknowledged reciept of the appeal by sending a response. In my view -- you have an appeal based on a procedural impropriety by the authority not sending any proof whatsoeve
  14. Hi mate -- are you the person with the disabled daughter
×
×
  • Create New...