I have an appeal hearing tomorrow advice needed please

[lamma]

it is up to the council to prove their case not the other way around. I do agree its a bit late but here gave been plenty of dodgy CCTV timing issues in the past. For close call situations a well prepared council could be expected to prove timings when they are critical to the issue in my view. Who knows what view the adjudicator may take.

[Spunkymonkey]

For close call situations a well prepared council could be expected to prove timings when they are critical to the issue in my view. Who knows what view the adjudicator may take.

 

And there lies the crux of the matter. He can't consider anything you don't raise, so there's no harm at all in raising it (and possibly some benefit if he's sitting there like most reasonable people would be, thinking how petty the Council are being)

[michelle1981]

Ok i have taken all advice on board, i cant thank you all enough.

 

I will attend the hearing tomorrow.

My case will be that:

 

It WAS after 18:30 at the time of me parking

How do we know if the clock is 100% accurate?

Have they compiled with section 2.3.12 of the code of practice for CCTV enforcement? Do you have proof?

 

Fingers crossed!

[Fair-Parking]

Michelle whether this helps or adds to the confusion is for you to deceide, but for my sins I was involved in drag racing for more than half my adult life.

 

It is a sport that relies on timing accuarcy far advanced of anything a council would use, but I can tell you that clocks that are calibrated before each event and which work accurately throughout it can still throw out the odd rogue reading without any good explanation.

 

In other words there is no such thing as 100% accuarate and reliable clocks no matter what anybody in authority tells you. Thus it is not unreasonable for you to be given the benefit of the doubt on what is pretty mean PCN to start with.

 

The weight of evidence lies with the authority to show that their clocks are never inaccurate and not to just assume that they are never wrong because they were calibrated whenever.

[nevos]

Isn't the appeals board funded from 75p in each ticket?

 

We went through a similar thing with a fluttering ticket, we asked the council for all details on parking offences in that part of town under the freedom of information act.

 

Didn't appeal because, we wanted to fight them under the human rights act since, decriminalisation took away everyones right to a trial. I had to pay £90 and wasn't even in the UK at the time but, my dear wife was driving.

[Al27]

Sorry the PCN which was sent by post states 18:29:00

 

Why are all the other times to the second, whereas this one sounds vague?(unless it actually was 29 mins on the dot)

[michelle1981]

Hmmm not really sure Al i guessed that it must have been on the dot, the others are all time recorded on stil images.

But the PCN has the date and time 18:29:00 none of the still images match this time tho!

[green_and_mean]

Didn't appeal because, we wanted to fight them under the human rights act since, decriminalisation took away everyones right to a trial.

 

Isn't that a bit of a contradiction? What is an appeal hearing if its not a 'trial' it is no different than standing in front of a magistrate prior to DPE.

The actual wording from the ststute is....

 

In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.

 

a) parking is not a criminal charge

b) you get an appeal hearing in front of an independant adjudicator regardless its criminal or not.

[crem]

Whilst it may be an arguement to challenge the accuracy of their time systems, I would have thought it is equally unreasonable that we all carry similarly accurate watches.

 

Working on the defence that the OP believed the time to be after 18:30 when they parked, I would hope that a reasonable person (are adjudicators reasonable people?) would consider a one minute contravention to be petty and trivial and within the tollerance of accuracy a normal person's watch could be expected to have.

[lamma]

watches can be found de minimis surely.

[NBeeee]

Whatever the vid evidence they submit should sort it i suppose. Any presence before abouy 18.27 and you're stuffed. if they only submit the 18.29 + then should be ok IMO.

I think Spunky mentioned - 'whatever they choose to bring'. More like whatever they have already submitted (you should already have it?) cos very few actually turn up!

 

so what does postal bundle say they are submitting?

[adamna]

What is an appeal hearing if its not a 'trial' it is no different than standing in front of a magistrate prior to DPE.

It's completely different. The magistrate had the authority to chuck it out. Adjudicators don't. Their hands are completely and utterly tied when it comes to reasonableness, which has always been important in law.

 

I guess I just hope you learn the hard way some day. Can I watch?

[Spunkymonkey]

More like whatever they have already submitted (you should already have it?) cos very few actually turn up!

 

so what does postal bundle say they are submitting?

 

That's a very good point. Not least because, even if they do turn up, if they try to introduce anything you haven't seen then you can scream blue murder - instant impartiality because you can't examine the evidence

 

Anyway, most of the recent posts are nice theoretical discussions but probably don't affect the OP unless she's still sitting up and sweating over this (which I hope she isn't).

 

In case you check in tomorrow before the hearing, good luck Michelle, and be sure to let us know how it goes and, especially if you're successful, on what grounds. After all, that is the main point of this forum!

 

Monkey

[adamna]

Yes good luck, and I hope you found the posts interesting and useful. Fingers crossed for a nice adjudicator, but they have to abide by the 'rules' however ridiculous. It's as well to know that you can't appeal to their sense of fairness, they are not allowed to have one.

[nevos]

G & M

Isn't that a bit of a contradiction? What is an appeal hearing if its not a 'trial' it is no different than standing in front of a magistrate prior to DPE.

The actual wording from the ststute is....

 

In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.

 

a) parking is not a criminal charge

b) you get an appeal hearing in front of an independant adjudicator regardless its criminal or not.

 

How can the trbunal be independant if it is funded by the ticket revenue?

 

All the councils signed up for the decriminalisation deal meaning, basically, you have no rights as the registered keeper picks up the tab rather than the offender!

[Al27]

It has to paid for somehow. The amount they get doesn't depend on how many tickets they do or don't uphold. If you're not happy about the independence, how do you suggest it's paid for?

 

What is an appeal hearing if its not a 'trial' it is no different than standing in front of a magistrate prior to DPE.

 

It's more like a hearing in a county (small claims) court.

[nevos]

All I can say is this: They will hardly put themselves out of a job. They are funded by every ticket issued.

[adamna]

Maybe they could be funded by every case they find against the LA. At high enough rates for the LA's to be a bit more careful with issuing tickets and considering representations. :D At the moment they have nothing to lose by being plain nasty.

[nevos]

Wife got done for a fluttering ticket which had fallen on to the top of the dashboard, it had £2.65 still left on it but, they refused to have it in any shape or form. Was surprised it didn't show up on the pics they took.

[michelle1981]

Hey everyone

 

I got a phone call this morning from TAPAS informing me that Ealing had failed to supply them with any evidence and that I had won the case!!

I didnt even have to attend.

Why didnt they just accept my appeal in the first place?

Oh well i won even if it was by default.

 

Thanks for all your advice, its great to have so many people offering free instant advice your all stars!

 

xx

[Spunkymonkey]

Congratulations, and well done on sticking to your guns long enough to win :D;)

 

Why they didn't accept the appeal in the first place is because they know that 90% of the public will cave in and pay. It really is as simple as that.

 

They also know that they're on very dodgy ground with a lot of these cases, which is why quite often they won't turn up. If they did then all the losses would start to add up and word would get out

 

So, the answer is to spread the word and get more people to not cave in if they get "caught" unfairly - just as you did.

 

 

:idea:Mods, can we have an official site hand-clappy smiley for this sort of thing please???:idea:

[Fair-Parking]

Michelle. This whole parking thing isn't about fair play or in my local council's propanganda (now that they have decided to go decriminalised) about keeping the streets free of 'bad parkers and obstructions to ambulances and pregnant women', but about money.

 

When that money becomes uneconomical to chase they give up and concentrate on the majority who just cave in.

[NBeeee]

I think Spunky mentioned - 'whatever they choose to bring'. More like whatever they have already submitted (you should already have it?) cos very few actually turn up!

 

so what does postal bundle say they are submitting?

 

Cough! What a surprise!

[adamna]

Congrats Michelle, but it's not a very satisfying way to 'win' is it? There ought to be some sanction when they don't follow through with a stupid fight that they started.

[lamma]

Nice one.