This is the sixteenth decision on an argument about the wording of the PCN which Mr Mustard first took in December. He wrote about it here. Fourteen of those decisions led to cancelled PCNs and Barnet Council correcting the wording. Two adjudicators disagreed which is their right.
If you have a moving traffic (school zig-zags issued by camera, yellow boxes, turning the wrong way or breaching a no entry) PCN issued in February 20 or earlier, it is probably not compliant and should be challenged if it has this wording on the front:
The actual fact of a contravention is not relevant if the PCN wording is non-compliant.
Clearly the adjudicators have had enough of Barnet Council contesting Appeals when in all fairness they should cancel the PCN. Being described as 'preoccupied' when you should consider the arguments in an unbiased manner without any thought as to the revenue attaching is the way an Adjudicator delicately gives out a good slapping as lawyers usually have a way with words.
If the case summary which was hard to follow was anything like some that Mr Mustard has seen it is because the council presented 3 pages of text without headings or any structure and hardly any gaps. It hurt Mr Mustard's head as well.
If Barnet Council keep fighting these PCNs, with the non-compliant wording, costs are going to start being awarded against them. If any of the motorists that Mr Mustard is helping receive costs due to his efforts he will ask for them to be donated to the North London Hospice.
Yours frugally
Mr Mustard
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.