Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • urm.. FmoTl twaddle me thinks followed here
    • 123 Abc efg   22/09/2019 Dear Sir,   Re:  v xyz. Case No: 123456   CPR 31.14 Request   On (date) I received the Claim Form in this case issued by you out of the county court of Salford.      I confirm having returned my acknowledgement of service to the court in which I indicate my intention to contest and counter claim all of your claim.   Please treat this letter as my request made under CPR 31.14 for the disclosure and the production of a verified and legible copy of [each of the following / the] document(s) mentioned in your Particulars of Claim:     1: The agreement/overdraft Facility Confirmation and Terms and Conditions from that date. You will appreciate that in an ordinary case and by reason of the provisions of CPR PD 16 para 7.3, where a claim is based upon a written agreement, a copy of the contract or documents constituting the agreement the original(s) should be available at the hearing. Further, that any general conditions incorporated in the contract should also be attached.   Failure to prove the above will render any claim unenforceable pursuant to section127 and 61b(3) CCA1974   2: The Demand/Termination Notice (Notice served under Sections 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974   3: Notices of Sums in Arrears under running account credit CCA2006 sec 86C   4. Notice of Assignment *   You should ensure compliance with your CPR 31 duties and ensure that the document(s) I have requested are disclosed at your earliest convenience.. Your CPR 31 duties extend to making a reasonable and proportionate search for the originals of the documents I have requested, the better for you to be able to verify the document's authenticity and to provide me with a legible copy. Further, where I have requested a copy of a document, the original of which is now in the possession of another person, you will have a right to possession of that document if you have mentioned it in your case. You must take immediate steps to recover and preserve it for the purpose of this case.   Where I have mentioned a document and there is in your possession more than one version of that same document owing to a modification, obliteration or other marking or feature, each version will be a separate document and you must provide a copy of each version of it to me. Your obligations extend to making a reasonable and proportionate search for any version(s) to include an obligation to recover and preserve such version(s) which are now in the possession of a third party.   In accordance with CPR 31.15© I undertake to be responsible for your reasonable copying costs incurred in complying with this CPR 31.14 request.   If you are unable to comply with this request and believe that you will never be able to comply with this request please confirm in your response.     Yours faithfully   Xyz. is this ok to send. and recorded delivery.
    • I have received statments back to 2008 from them, Its a big file, with lots of the original papaerwork, a lot of this I have not seen for a long time and im sure this wasnt in the previous SAR.  There is some information that has been erased, it seems to be the Witness or agents/sales persons name!    
    • removed again please read upload carefully you must obscure or remove all re number etc 1st line has ref number try and put up the right way  too?   dx  
  • Our picks

Judicial Review Req'd

Variable Speed Limit Setup Errors by Highways England Remote Sign and Camera Operators

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 352 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Two questions: A) Has there been a precedent for instances of inconsistent, incorrect or the inappropriate application of variable speed limit policy on a Motorway providing a legal basis to challenge a speeding ticket?

 

For example:

 

1) Motorway road works have road side speed limit signs stating 60 mph but overhead gantry displaying lower variable speed limit i.e. 30 mph without risk factor justification. The remotely controlled gantry signs do not correspond to conditions on the ground.

 

2) Motorway road works end and maybe end of road works signs are displayed each side of the road but subsequent overhead gantries incorrectly displaying variable speed limit of 60 mph without risk factor justification. The remotely controlled gantry signs do not correspond to conditions on the ground.

 

3) Motorway overhead gantries correctly displaying variable speed limit during time period of high traffic volume but erroneously left on during subsequent time period of low traffic volume without risk factor justification. The remotely controlled gantry signs do not correspond to conditions on the ground.

 

4) Motorway single overhead gantry displaying variable speed limit of 50 mph immediately followed by overhead gantry displaying national speed limit without risk factor justification prior during or after. The remotely controlled gantry signs do not correspond to conditions on the ground.

 

5) Motorway road works reducing four lanes to two lanes having no variable speed limit applied followed by road works with the same lack of risk factor justification but with overhead gantries displaying variable speed limit. The remotely controlled gantry signs are not consistently applied to the same ground conditions.

 

B) How incorrect or contradictory does a variable speed limit need to be before drivers should rely on their better judgement of the surrounding context to determine their progress without fear of the current judicial process automatically presuming guilt with no requirement for errors by Highways England to be accepted in defence or mitigation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some years ago a motorist challenged a ticket he had received for exceeding the speed limit displayed on the M4 close to Heathrow airport. His challenge was that the limit was unnecessary as it did not reflect the conditions at the time.

 

He won.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone who travels on the m25 at night will know that many times they forget to change the displayed limit and in some spots is 40.

This happens at 2-3am with empty roads.

I go at the speed displayed even if it doesn't make sense.

I prefer to keep my licence clean rather than pay insurance companies for their solid gold taps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks john and king.

 

So there does not seem to be common, readily available examples of an established process to tackle these issues but seems to be a steady stream of people stating effectively that remotely controlled gantry signs and use of cameras do not correspond to conditions on the ground.

 

Does anyone know the process and people involved in implementing a variable speed limit,

a Single Justice Procedural Notice (SJPN) refers to a named key witness Camera Technician,

are these people Police Officers or do they work for Highways England.

 

How are Highways England involved?

Their web site states ... Highways England operates, maintains and improves England’s motorways and major A roads.

They also have a general enquires phone number and complaints procedure the aim of which they state as …

If you’re unhappy with any part of the service we provide, we want to hear about your experiences so we can learn from them and improve.

 

Has anyone experience of reporting issues to Highways England?

Don't they put up those signs around some roadworks asking people to report any concerns on a given phone number?

Edited by Judicial Review Req'd
Typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've contacted Highways many times to tell them that their signs on the M1 are incorrect but usually their response is that they have only just finished doing whatever the sign said was happening. 99% of the time that is an outright lie but I know they are never going to admit it.

 

And they wonder why, in general, most drivers ignore the recommendations to slow down. Obviously the variable limits have to be adhered to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we have all seen examples of where someone sitting in a darkened cubicle somewhere has applied a speed limit when there was no need for that application but that is the law so you stick to the speed (or thereabouts) indicated by the signs.

 

Where they are used to try and maintain traffic flow where there is congestion it is doomed to failure because the variable speed limits were based on computer modelling done years ago by Sybase rather than actual driving conditions observation. However, governemnts like to follow failure by throwing more resources at the problem to create a bigger failure rather than try something different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...