Author Topic: We always knew they reject your first appeal out of hand. Now there's proof.  (Read 1931 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline The Bald Eagle

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 4392
  • THE lowest common denominator
Tribunal criticises parking managers

PARKING bosses in Bury have been slammed for failing to adequately consider appeals from motorists challenging tickets.
They were accused of “blatant procedural impropriety” by a Traffic Penalty Tribunal adjudicator after she upheld an appeal by Ron Ashworth, who received a £30 ticket in April.

He was told his Suzuki was not parked correctly within a bay at a car park in Bolton Street, Bury.
Mr Ashworth, aged 60, challenged the parking ticket, but was told there were “no grounds for the cancellation of the charge” because his vehicle was parked in contravention of the relevant restriction.

The ticket had been issued by NSL which is contracted by Bury Council to enforce parking regulations.
However, after he took the case to the hearing in Manchester, adjudicator Ms Maggie Kennedy upheld his appeal.
In her written judgment, she stated: “The council know that they have a duty at both the informal and formal representations stages to consider the representations made by the motorist and or owner.
 
“I have previously allowed a sizeable number of appeals because the council’s contractors expressly said they did not have the authority to consider ‘mitigation’ and then required the motorist to write again separately to the council if they wished to pursue their denied statutory right.

“The council have addressed this but regrettably either they or their contractors still fail to grasp the point. The contractors responded to this appellant with no further consideration of the representations than before, and still requiring him to write if he wished to ‘appeal’.”
 
Ms Kennedy added: “This remains a blatant procedural impropriety. The representation put forward must be considered.
“This standard, inappropriate letter fails to address any of the points raised by the appellant. Given the unusual argument he raised, one might have expected considerably more.”

Mr Ashworth, who lives in Rawtenstall, said: “The adjudicator accepted my argument. My worry is that NSL and the council simply tick boxes and ignore representation.

“The council didn’t turn up at the tribunal. They assume 99 per cent of people pay up and take no account of your representation.”

A spokesman for Bury Council said: “We have taken on board the comments made by the parking adjudicator. As a result, we have had meetings with managers from NSL and their replies to appeals will now make it clear that mitigation has been addressed where it has been presented.”

http://www.burytimes.co.uk/news/9467517.Tribunal_criticises_parking_managers/
« Last Edit: 12 January, 2012, 09:28:59 PM by Coco »
WE ARE WATCHING YOU

Offline Ewan Hoosami

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 2227
  • Veni, Vidi, $chunti. I came, I saw, I assisted.
Unfortunately, this is nothing new. There are a couple of example cases on the penalty tribunal website of parking weasels not exercising their powers of discretion;

http://www.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk/site/scripts/documents_info.php?documentID=132&pageNumber=20

My feeling is that Bury, along with all the others, will carry on along this path. They have no conscience about where the money comes from and armed with the knowledge that a proportion of penalties will be paid they will continue to flout the law. As for NSL following regulations, not bloody likely squire.

Appealing to the council is like playing chess with a pigeon. You might be a chess grand master but the pigeon will always knock all the pieces over, shit on the board and then strut around triumphantly.

Nigel W

  • Guest
My Email to the now disgraced Ex Parking Manager at Richmond Mr Terry Powell:

Dear Mr Powell,
                            Here is a copy of your new updated leaflet which now represents the truth about how you operate your department.

Understanding parking penalties.
We issue PCN's on a random basis. These are often churned out by us when we observe vehicles in our unlawfully marked bays. We constantly and routinely use cameras intended and provided for other uses solely for “enforcement.” We issue these tickets even when it is pointed out to us that our bays are unlawful. We do not care that we ourselves do not uphold the law. We merely expect that YOU pay any amount to us when it is demanded. This is even in cases where we know that we are in the wrong. We never admit that we are wrong even when we know that we are.
Once a PCN has been issued, we will take the steps we specify wether or not they comply with legislation to recover the charge.

The diagram in this leaflet shows how your PCN will progress if it is not paid in full.

How to contest
If you want to contest the issue of your PCN, then you must write to us. This is so we can then completely disregard anything that you have said in your letter.
When you write, it is important for you to include the following information clearly:

    The PCN number (RTnnnnnnnn)
    Your vehicle registration number
    Your full name and address

This is because we issue so many of the aforementioned tickets that we are unable to trace them from just the PCN number. Our computer is not able to find them by just the PCN number. Your address is required to save us the trouble and expense of locating you through DVLA. This also enables us to send you demands for payment.

In your correspondence you should include as much information as possible and copies of any supporting documentation. The reason for this is because we expect you to waste as much of your time as possible preparing your appeal. Information received will be held in accordance with the Council’s Data Protection Policy in our dustbin.

As soon as we receive your correspondence, we will put it straight into the bin. Your case will then be on hold and send you a letter of acknowledgement.

We will then not investigate the circumstances regarding the issue of the PCN, not taking your comments into account, and will send you a letter rejecting your appeal out of hand. We will send this written response to you at an address that we know that you are not at at the time as soon as possible. We do this because we hope that you do not receive it in time to act on it. This is usually by return mail as we do not actually look into many appeals and require you to pay up regardless and as soon as possible. The letter of rejection that we send will be full of obvious facts and will misrepresent those facts as much as possible. We will make up things to put in it and ignore the Laws of the Land in so doing.

If we do bother to look into your representations this will be done by someone who has no understanding of what they are doing whatsoever. This will result in the same rejection as before. This is why we rarely bother to read these representations save for glancing at them, laughing at them and consigning them to our very large bin.

If you then complain about this service we will ignore all communications from you. We are a law unto ourselves and do not care what we do or do not do or who or what we run roughshod over in so doing or not doing. If you use email for a complaint or to ask us any awkward questions, all you will get is an automatic response stating that it will be dealt with by an officer as soon as possible. In reality we will not deal with it at all and just ignore it.

I trust that you will agree that it represents your departments operation with far more accuracy than the original.
Please arrange to have it printed and distributed as soon as possible.
                       
                                                                                    Regards,
                                                                                                   Nigel Wise.



Offline Ewan Hoosami

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 2227
  • Veni, Vidi, $chunti. I came, I saw, I assisted.
There's a lot more truth in that than many people care to admit. I don't know if Terry Powell jumped or was pushed but one thing I do know, Richmond is a much better place without him.

 dr00L    :aplude:     :pmsl:      ;D
Appealing to the council is like playing chess with a pigeon. You might be a chess grand master but the pigeon will always knock all the pieces over, shit on the board and then strut around triumphantly.

 


Supporters of the NoToMob

In order to view this object you need Flash Player 9+ support!

Get Adobe Flash player