Legally parked car removed while on holiday

[Tony P]

Lucky girl to have had a fair and enquiring Adjudicator.

[tsvakayi66]

[Jamberson]

This just goes to show how complex these situations can be. Despite two promising theories, it turns out the contravention code was wrong and none of us knew! Well done to the adjudicator for doing his/her job properly!

[tsvakayi66]

Sorry tried to see how the letters can be enlarged but failed miserably, can I have a lesson on how to do this. I have scanned the letters and the scanned sizes are JPG 2550 X 3509 (826 KB) and 724X 1024 (104 KB) respectively, but after uploading they convert to a mere 8KB and 7.9KB respectively......totally confused. Thought it would be easy.

 

Thanks

Edited February 22, 2012 by tsvakayi66
error

[tsvakayi66]

Thank you Green and mean for extracting the illegible upload, you saved me from trouble.

 

Thanks again

[tsvakayi66]

Thanks was freaking out here, got it

[tsvakayi66]

Yes Thank you Jamberson, but you realise without putting heads together you can not sniff out the hidden truth....

[Jamberson]

Sorry tried to see how the letters can be enlarged but failed miserably, can I have a lesson on how to do this. I have scanned the letters and the scanned sizes are JPG 2550 X 3509 (826 KB) and 724X 1024 (104 KB) respectively, but after uploading they convert to a mere 8KB and 7.9KB respectively......totally confused. Thought it would be easy.

 

Thanks

 

One way is to upload them somewhere else, like Photobucket.com. Then post the link here, so we can look.

[tsvakayi66]

Hi guys

 

The refund still hasnt arrived, can I claim interest on it and if so from when?? What is the procedure in layman's terms.

 

Thank you

[Jamberson]

Realistically, no. Just call them and ask when you can expect it.

[tsvakayi66]

Thank you Jambs.

[TheBogsDollocks]

"The Appellant's defence in the Notice of Appeal appears to have been lifted from the internet where copies of it may be found.

 

I reject the Appellant's defence as raised in the Notice of Appeal. I am satisfied that an authority has power to remove a vehicle parked in contravention and require payment of the penalties incurred before releasing the vehicle. "

 

It' s good that the adjudicator found a simple reason to allow the appeal and he is to be commended for it. However, it is a great pity that he fails to justify his satisfaction that the charges under s.101A RTRA 1984 are applicable when the evidence is to the contrary. He failed to explain why he was satisfied the charges under s.101A RTRA 1984 were applicable rather than those under s.102(2A) RTRA 1984. The charges under section 101A are only applicable to those vehicles that a council considers to be abandoned and their disposal is pending. Evidence of this is clearly given under regulation 18 of The Removal and Disposal of Vehicles (Traffic Officers) (England) Regulations 2008. Note what "Part 3" and regulation 18 fall under. The truth is the adjudicator dodged the embarassing issue and allowed the appeal on a minor & harmless issue. This is not an example of justice it's an example of PATAS avoiding admitting they have cocked up for the last 18 years. Don't be fooled that the adjudicator is altruistic.

Edited March 3, 2012 by TheBogsDollocks

[tsvakayi66]

Very well put, the disection of the law is illusive and requires sharp knives, but even with a sharp knife you have to be very artistic and knowlegeable about which joints to cut or disect.

 

Thnak you for the observation TBDollocks