Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About Mike505

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. I never admitted "I didnt bother to look". I made it quite clear in my plea that signs should be clear and visible in all meteorological conditions. That is why I then added that it was not visible in the rain because even in clear conditions it would have been hard to see. Regardless of all that... why dont you question their decision to rotate the sign? Isnt that the most glaring fact here? Shouldnt they be refunding me the penalty which they now was enforced under false conditions?
  2. Yes the lamp post has been changed judging by the photos. The fact remains that I would have seen the sign in its present orientation, even with the height and the rain. had the sign been facing the right way, it would have been visible to someone walking to or from the ticket machine. Look.. the whole gist of my argument is that they have changed the sign to conform with my defence plea, and as such it throws the whole of the adjudicator's ruling out of the window.
  3. "While I accept that Mr. xxx made a genuine error, this amounts only to mitigation." So when does "mitigation" become more than just mitigation? In my view, when the "mitigation" has been changed to reflect the defence plea. It is an admission by the council that their signs are NOT clearly visible. But they went ahead and collected the penalty anyway. Did they charge me for giving them advice on how to display their signs? Yes they did. Surely this is unjust.
  4. I believe that this was what was in the adjudicator's letter. Dont you agree that the council, having collected their fine, then go and rotate the sign as per my plea constitute an admission of guilt tantamount to fraud? It is clear I would have seen the sign had it been in its present orientation and thus this is an unjust and duplicitous penalization. If the council had been satisfied with the decision above they would not have changed the sign, and thus they should issue a refund
  5. (a) In my plea I said the sign was too high AND facing the wrong way. Both contribute to the sign being inadequately visible, therefore a PCN generator (b) The wind blew it? really? Exactly 90 degrees? God must have disagreed with the tribunal and heard my plea then. Also why would a kid waste his ASBO energy to rotate a sign thats 11 feet high? Indeed, why would ANY third party bother to rotate the sign? © As honeybee said, the pcn and case numbers have been deleted for privacy reasons. On reflection I think it was foolish to have have posted them, but I am glad they were blanked (thanks
  6. Thank you Honeybee13. Michael, you have shown blatant contempt for my posts calling me a liar on more than one occasion. There is no point in posting the adjudicator's decision, I am not anxious to have you onside. Suffice to say the jury is still out on this one. If you are really interested, stay tuned and I will update. Other than that I have nothing further to say to you.
  7. For Christ's sake Michael... I HAVE POSTED THE NUMBERS A FEW POSTS UP AND THEY HAVE BEEN BLANKED!!!!! Why are you so adamant on seeing them? You dont have to believe anything I say, just stop responding to me and go about your business. As I have said, the tribunal said they are looking into the matter. . if they dont have the details that you say I am "hiding", why would they be looking into the matter? Or dont you believe me on that either? In which case say so so and I will stop responding to you. have a good day sir.
  8. Excuse me Michael, you are getting rather tiresome. The only documentation that I am NOT in possession of is the tribunal's decision letter. I HAVE all the rest. As I said in my previous post, I have managed to contact the adjudicators and they are looking into the matter, so what is your problem? The tribunal have all the documentations (pcn, decison letter, my defence plea, my recent letter to them showing the rotated parking sign etc etc) and they are REVIEWING the case. Or are you saying that YOU want to see the docs? Why? You have alre
  9. Michael, let me assure you that I am not some whacko wasting other people's time. If you care to trace this thread before you embark on invective, I did include the pcn and case numbers but they have been blanked, probably by the moderators. I have finally gotten through to the adjudicators by phone and they tell me they are on the case. They have forwarded my recent photo (above) to the council and they are awaiting their response. I am not saying its an open and shut case, but why, when I thoroughly pleaded my case of inappropriately placed signs,
  10. There is no reluctance MB, I simply dont have it. But what is there to know? They ruled against me and thats that. I will dig some more and try to find it. The main thing is that they have refused to even acknowledge my recent correspondence to them with copies of my plea and recent photos. They know once they enter into correspondance they may be forced to reverse their decision. This injustice doesnt just affect me personally, it affects the public on the whole. You'd think a council body would own up to their mistakes, not when it come t
  11. So far I have not written to the council, only to the adjudicators hoping that they would reverse their decision. Obviously, judging by their silence they are hoping I will go away. I am going to write the council too, but I am not hopeful about a reply. As for Basic Account Holder, I wrote on this forum hoping to get some suggestions for justice.. comments like yours smack of schadenfreude and not at all helpful.
  12. No solicitor or small claims court want to handle mycase because the sum involved is too low for them, but I really cant afford to lose £130. Its a big hit on my finances and its totally unfair
  13. Yes I know CraigMcK, their colour bay claims are quite incredible Michael, the Tribunal REF is:..... and the PCN is:..... I feel like I have been mugged for £130 in this case. I have sent them exhaustive diagrams and photographs as to how I could have never seen the "stealth" do not park sign, and the adjudicators didnt take a blind bit of notice and now the council go and change the sign exactly as per the suggestion I made in my plea. I have all the evidence
  14. Sorry but I cant find the adjudicator's decision note, but I have confirmation of payment from the council
  15. Hi Jamberson They didnt move it, they just rotated 90 degrees so its visible just as I wrote in my defence plea. This seems so unfair that they can have their cake and eat it.. either they were in the wrong or in the right, and their action of changing the sign proves that they were clearly in the wrong. This is extortion and the adjudicators help them with it.
  • Create New...