Jump to content

Recycler

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    117
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5 Neutral

About Recycler

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. nb the top part of Crouch End Hill Bus Lane has not been repainted since roadworks a year or so ago
  2. remember TPT is the provincial version of PATAS - case load split nationally 10% TPT / 90% PATAS (London) The London adjudicators have not (yet) followed Mr Binns lead at TPT... The argument needs developing into a stronger piece of work - relying on the statutory / operational guidance is probably not going to be sufficient (IMHO) as there is no MUSTS only SHOULDs...... Suggest you look at Lambeths 2009 parking report "The council operates the CCTV cameras in accordance with London Councils’ CCTV Code of Practice" & importantly when you check the CCTV Code of Practice
  3. Jane Packer contains references to the definition of loading covering more than the immediate physical act of loading goods into a vehicle - ie paperwork, travelling in & out of buildings etc etc If you can provide evidence to support your claim ie invoices relating to pc servicing etc & check the online images to see if any photos support your arguments
  4. TPT key cases also hold a credit card surcharge case relating to Bristol from 2005...the other grounds are also interesting & have wider relevance to appelants Example Cases - Traffic Penalty Tribunal BS881 A Council is required to inform the motorist how payment of a penalty charge may be made. Various methods may be used including, for example, payment by cash, cheque or card. What the Council may not do, however, is add a surcharge on payments made by credit card. That would amount to an unlawful increase of the amount that may be charged by way of penalty. The Council has n
  5. http://www.hackney.gov.uk/parking-services-financial-report.pdf 2008 - 2009 tickets down - revenue up....differential parking?
  6. without a warrant the company is chasing an unpaid invoice - fees for letters & visits relating to the collection of rd traffic debts are regulated via statutory instruments and acts of parliament laying out the procedures to be followed. Philips & Westminster appear to be playing a different game!
  7. adjudicators take a dim view of stopping on a bus stop in my experience to be a bus stop it MUST have a sign - which will carry the no stopping red cross on a blue circle and words no stopping at any time except buses - most are signed correctly...
  8. sounds like youve been on the receiving end of some serious tandem fee charging bailiffs fees are based on the "sum due" - say £150 due to Westminster for each PCN + £5 Ct Fee a bailiffs letter fee can be applied of £13.16 per warrant If on visiting a bailiff has 16 warrants to collect, they may do the calculations per warrant thereby increasing the fee dramatically eg 1. Sum due on 16 warrants = £2480 - bailiff maths for visits is 28% of first £200 then 5% of amount over £200 = £56 + £114 = £170 (+VAT) eg 2. Sum due on 16 warrants - by calculating each fee seperatel
  9. The baillif company having been granted leave to appeal the decsion have decided not to pursue the application... The Judge had specified in granting permission to appeal "The bailiff was following the practice in force for 15 years. No one has challenged the right to charge for wheelclamping before. My decision that they cannot do so (at least to the extent that they have charged until now) not only affects the London Borough of Camden but also every Borough with de-criminalised parking. Accordingly, it has significant local and possible National implications and that is a comp
  10. the judgement is quite specific in that the effect wil be on all future bailiff clamping activity not past... more details to follow..
  11. In the Central London County Court - Case No 8CL51015 - Anthony Culligan (Claimant) v 1. Jason Simkin & 2. Marstons (Defendants). Before District Judge Advent 9th & 24th September 2008 Mr Culligan challenged the bailiffs fees & charges imposed by Mr Simkin and Marstons when levying distress and seeking to remove Mr Culigans car for non-payment of a Penalty Charge Notice issued by the London Borough of Camden. The Judgment goes a long way to clarify exactly what a Bailiff can charge for levying distress. Bailiffs have always sought to charge for fixing an immobilisati
  12. Audit commission windows now open but closing in @ 5 days background & generic objection After completion of a council’s annual statement of accounts it is made available for public scrutiny for one month before the District Auditor checks and approves them (or requires changes). Most or many council’s financial year ends 31st March with accounts published during July. Councils are required to publish in the local press these details in the month before. Any elector of the council’s area (or anyone acting on behalf of an elector) can provide in writing a Not
  13. which council issued the ticket & find out when which bailiff co (not the bailiffs name)((Tom T can check the bailiffs certification out)) check when TEC issued the warrant (only valid 1 year) sounds like you have every right to file a statutory declaration at TEC a £40 ticket would end up at £120 with a £5 court fee background to pt 4 complaints & links to the forms here London Motorists Action Group - Bailiff Certification Complaints Process do some research & get your ducks lined up before sending off the forms...
×
×
  • Create New...