Planner1 Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 So a traffic adjudicator, independent of the council, told the council they were wrong and had not acted fair. Did the council accept the input from an independent expert who knows what he is doing? No they did not like it. No wonder you are against independent reviews of schemes. Have you read the adjudication? He didn't say they were "wrong". He acknowledged that the Council had put in place a fully legally compliant signing and lining arrangement. The adjudicator said he thought it would be "fairer" if they included the roadmarking he specified. Any proper legal process has appeal mechanisms to which anyone can have recourse if they feel their case has not been dealt with properly. The people who appealed their penalities exercised that right. Why would you not expect the Council to exercise the same right? The legal system often invloves interpretation and there are not easily defned rights and wrongs. This is just one such case. As I said earlier, lots of other Local Authorites have recieved strange and unexpected adjudication decisions, it's just the way the legal system works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoroB Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 I live at Hillsborough and the main cause of the parking congestion around the shop's is the Tram user's who won't pay to park and ride. People who live outside the area and ironically, who did'nt want the Tram to run past their homes are parking their car's from 8am -5pm All that will happen with the permit's is people will just park on the edge of the permit zone until eventually all the surrounding area's will need permit's Totally agree sid63. The permit scheme has not solved this issue, just displaced the problem over a wider area. But now the council can charge for the 'service' they are providing. And then increase the charges at will by extotionate amounts. ---------- Post added 14-01-2013 at 13:41 ---------- Have you read the adjudication? He didn't say they were "wrong". He acknowledged that the Council had put in place a fully legally compliant signing and lining arrangement. The adjudicator said he thought it would be "fairer" if they included the roadmarking he specified. Any proper legal process has appeal mechanisms to which anyone can have recourse if they feel their case has not been dealt with properly. The people who appealed their penalities exercised that right. Why would you not expect the Council to exercise the same right? The legal system often invloves interpretation and there are not easily defned rights and wrongs. This is just one such case. As I said earlier, lots of other Local Authorites have recieved strange and unexpected adjudication decisions, it's just the way the legal system works. Wrong/fair lets quibble over words, actually the dictionary deifines fair as: In a proper or legal manner so perhaps fair is the appropriate word in this instance. Sorry Planner 1, my fault, fair it is. So the council, having acted in an inproper or illegal manner, then proceeded to fine people. No wonder people appealed these incorrect, inproper and/or iilegal fines. Just to clear matters up on this issue, did the council apologise? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Planner1 Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 Wrong/fair lets quibble over words, actually the dictionary deifines fair as: In a proper or legal manner so perhaps fair is the appropriate word in this instance. Sorry Planner 1, my fault, fair it is. So the council, having acted in an inproper or illegal manner, then proceeded to fine people. Well, as it seems you want to quibble. The adjudicator said "fairer" which implies that it was fair (ie proper or legal) in the first place. He couldn't say any different as it was authorised (ie made legal) in writing by the DfT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoroB Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 Well, as it seems you want to quibble. The adjudicator said "fairer" which implies that it was fair (ie proper or legal) in the first place. He couldn't say any different as it was authorised (ie made legal) in writing by the DfT. Looks like it was the adjudicator who quibbled with the council for not doing enough. Did the council apologise to the people who they fined in error? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HotPhil Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 Did the council apologise to the people who they fined in error? To be fair they didn't fine anyone in error. The numpty who took it to the adjudicator clearly shouldn't have been driving - to be that unobservant of all the signs you have to wonder what else he wasn't seeing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Planner1 Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 Looks like it was the adjudicator who quibbled with the council for not doing enough. Did the council apologise to the people who they fined in error? Looks to me that you just want to knock the Council, irrespective of the facts or the circumstances. They didn't fine anyone in error. People who appeal a penalty do not pay anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoroB Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 Looks to me that you just want to knock the Council, irrespective of the facts or the circumstances. They didn't fine anyone in error. People who appeal a penalty do not pay anything. People who win an appeal do not pay anything. The council made an error with signs according to the independent adjudicator. Did the council accept this with good grace? Did the fines stand? Did the council apologise? I could say that you seem to defend the council, irrespective of the facts or the circumstances. This thread is entitled 'Parking permits in Hillsborough'. As I live, work, shop and socialise in Hillsborough on an almost daily basis I have a vested interest in the parking permit scheme and the way it impacts on people. In this respect I think that the parking permit scheme has not made any improvements and that the tramgate system causes congestion. Are you saying that I am not entitled to an opinion because I am a member of the public, rather than an ex council official and I knock the council on these issues? ---------- Post added 16-01-2013 at 11:04 ---------- To be fair they didn't fine anyone in error. The numpty who took it to the adjudicator clearly shouldn't have been driving - to be that unobservant of all the signs you have to wonder what else he wasn't seeing. If the fine wasn't in error why did the appellant win his case? If the appellant was behind me I think i'd prefer him to be watching how close he was to me rather than signs. I've yet to be rear-ended by a sign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retep Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 Have you read the adjudication? He didn't say they were "wrong". He acknowledged that the Council had put in place a fully legally compliant signing and lining arrangement. The adjudicator said he thought it would be "fairer" if they included the roadmarking he specified. Any proper legal process has appeal mechanisms to which anyone can have recourse if they feel their case has not been dealt with properly. The people who appealed their penalities exercised that right. Why would you not expect the Council to exercise the same right? The legal system often invloves interpretation and there are not easily defned rights and wrongs. This is just one such case. As I said earlier, lots of other Local Authorites have recieved strange and unexpected adjudication decisions, it's just the way the legal system works. Have you, here it is have a good read, http://meetings.sheffield.gov.uk/council-meetings/cabinet/agendas-2008/agenda-9-july-2008/hillsborough-bustram-gate-penalty-charge-not Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mumkin Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 Have you, here it is have a good read, http://meetings.sheffield.gov.uk/council-meetings/cabinet/agendas-2008/agenda-9-july-2008/hillsborough-bustram-gate-penalty-charge-not I think you are wasting your pixels expecting an admission that either he or SCC are wrong...........never happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevo Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 I think you are wasting your pixels expecting an admission that either he or SCC are wrong...........never happens. As usual they only listen to what they want to as is quite evident on here there's a lot of opposition to what they do but they can't stand the truth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.