Showing posts with label mount pleasant lane. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mount pleasant lane. Show all posts

16 June 2022

Hackney - illegal pursuit of PCNs

Back in November 2021 Mr Mustard won an Appeal at London Tribunals that neutralised the Traffic Management Order prohibiting motor vehicles at a certain point in Mount Pleasant Lane - as the certain point which Hackney Council described couldn't possibly exist.

It is the case that decisions by independent adjudicators at London Tribunals don't set precedents, an adjudicator being able to decide one case one way and the next case, apparently the same, a different way. This is because cases turn on little factual nuances. However, in a situation whereby an Adjudicator has found a fundamental and clear flaw in a traffic order it is likely that the decision to cancel a PCN will be followed by other adjudicators. The odd thing though is that unless the motorist who got the PCN challenges the PCN on the grounds that the Traffic Order is invalid then the adjudicator, who probably decides 100 cases a week all over London and so won't remember a case he decided weeks or months ago, won't do what Mr Mustard did and look really closely at the description within the traffic order and a map and get his measuring tape out.

The adjudicator decides Appeals based upon the representations and arguments which have been made, not normally adding any of his own, being independent after all.

Here is the decision that must have put Hackney Council into a panic.


A council having discovered that a traffic order is effectively invalid should take the appropriate administrative steps to draw up a new order, correctly stating the location, and not take any further action against people who have outstanding PCNs. In addition, having realised that they have issued thousands of invalid PCNs they should proactively refund everyone affected. That isn't, unsurprisingly, what they did as PCNs are all about the money. Hackney Council told the local paper that everything was hunky dory, and unless the motorist challenged the validity of the traffic order, Hackney Council would present what they knew was an invalid traffic order to the adjudicator. Mr Mustard knows of two cases where the traffic order was challenged as part of the Appeal and Hackney Council quietly folded their hand on those two cases.

Mr Mustard also knows, as the register is a public document, of all these people who fought their PCNs in front of an indepndent adjudicator at London Tribunals and lost, because Hackney Council submitted as evidence a traffic order which they know does not have an enforceable location of contravention stated. This was dishonest.


Mr Mustard has a friend who is a retired lawyer and he now works pro bono (for free) for people who have been the subject of injustice. We can easily locate the school and the business but the other listed victims could live anywhere, although they most probably live in London. Mr Mustard needs your help to track them down. Please, if you know any of the people listed above, please show them this blog post and get them to click on this link for the story in the Hackney Gazette, and ask them to email mrmustard@zoho.com so that their details can be passed to the solicitor who will try and get them their money back.

End.

2 February 2022

Hackney Council FOI - 'Sorry' not in their vocabulary

 

Mount Pleasant Lane

Before we get to the purpose of the blog Mr Mustard just wants to say that if you drive through this gap you are an ignorant or an incompetent driver, you choose (why?, 6 signs, 6!). Remember Mr Mustard's mantra, 'planter = penalty' (probably). Still unsure? google 'flying motorbike sign'.

So here are the two responses received to a Freedom of Information (FOI) request. The first one was patently wrong, there being no ambiguity in Mr Mustard's eyes.




If Hackney Council were unsure what was required they should have asked for clarification. Mr Mustard would have respected the council if they had simply said, 'sorry, we misunderstood what you wanted and here are the new figures' but instead they blame Mr Mustard for asking ambiguous questions, that is an unedifying approach.

It is very concerning that 1 in 8 PCNs have reached a bailiff. Part of the reason for this is the disaster which was DVLA in the early stages of the pandemic when they didn't have on line systems for updating the address at which a vehicle is kept.

On the positive side Hackney Council were more than fair in sending out zero value warning notices for 3 months which gave the people for whom this was a regular route the opportunity to chance their habits for free. Thereby Hackney achieved their objective of changing traffic flow without soaking the motorist in the process.

End.

Not quite the end as there is another story coming about this location, although Mr Mustard might let the newspapers have it.