Authorities should take account of the CEO’s actions in issuing the penalty charge but should always give challenges and representations a fresh and impartial consideration.
Under general principles of public law, authorities have a duty to act fairly and proportionately and are encouraged to exercise discretion sensibly and reasonably and with due regard to the public interest. Failure to act in accordance with the general principles of public law may lead to a claim for a decision to be judicially reviewed.
Enforcement authorities have a duty not to fetter their discretion, so should ensure that PCNs, NtOs, leaflets and any other advice they give do not mislead the public about what they may consider in the way of representations.
They should approach the exercise of discretion objectively and without regard to any financial interest in the penalty or decisions that may have been taken at an earlier stage in proceedings.
What Newham Council have also forgotten is their own traffic order, which has this section:
The two minute rule doesn't apply as this is a little side road (not in Schedules 5 and 2) and not within the 2 minute limited times.
Therefore the time which is allowed, for a person who uses a stick or a frame or who simply walks slowly without any aids, due to age or infirmity, is as long as it takes. Newham Council have therefore unreasonably rejected a perfectly fair challenge (and also tried to put the motorist off a further challenge by the usual reminder that the discount will be gone at the next stage).
Mr Mustard doesn't much care for the discount expect for one of 100% as he fights to the end and generally knows the parameters an independent adjudicator, who makes decisions without an eye on the income, will apply. They will generally allow at least 5 minutes for assisted boarding. The frailty of a passenger can be demonstrated by a medical report, a photo of them with their stick or frame or a 10 second video of them walking.
Mr Mustard doesn't fear Newham Council. He has fought 38 of their PCNs since 2017 of which 24 went as far as the independent adjudicators. He has lost 2. He isn't about to lose a third case.
To their credit, Newham Council weren't 100% unhelpful, they did add this to their letter:
We only know that father walks with an aid, we don't know whether or not he could make his own application, which would be a more respectful way to write.
The end (for now).
No comments:
Post a Comment
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.