16 August 2016

Sauce for the goose (sub-title: photographs are so yesterday)

Mr Mustard was once told by an Adjudicator that provided the council got things about 90% correct procedurally that was OK. Mr Mustard said that was inequitable as motorists have to get things 100% correct or suffer a PCN. 'You may well say that Mr Mustard*' said the Adjudicator. 'I just did' said Mr Mustard. After some months of delay Mr Mustard's remark has been seen to stick in the mind of the Adjudicator, who recently made this ruling:

Mr Mustard thinks this must have been a time when traffic wardens were using separate cameras, on which they could alter the time and date which left scope for trickery, although nowadays the camera is built into the hand held equipment so times and dates will correspond.

Note how the council unfairly expect their mistakes to be overlooked when they will pursue you to the bitter end for the tiniest mistake that you make. This decision does rather show that adjudicators are independent.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

* The Adjudicator will have used Mr Mustard's real name. Mr Mustard addressed the adjudicator as 'Sir' as that is the requirement at the tribunal (or 'Madam' for lady adjudicators). It is 4 years now since Mr Mustard started to represent people at the tribunal and the adjudicators and Mr Mustard know what to expect from each other. Some are more cordial than others and more prepared to listen to abstract technical arguments but everyone plays with a straight bat and there is humour. "I see you are here to amuse us again Mr Mustard" is one of the best remarks sent Mr Mustard's way. Whatever is thrown at him, Mr Mustard keeps his cool and polite demeanour as, to be fair, do the representatives of local authorities even when a curve ball lands in their lap.

1 comment:

  1. I am rather surprised that an adjudicator admits to allowing what could be major errors in council administration of enforcement. OK, the de minimis argument can be put forward by either side, but I would have thought that if percentages are to be allocated, 97-99% might be better and reflect de minimis in reality.


I now moderate comments in the light of the Delfi case. Due to the current high incidence of spam I have had to turn word verification on.