Planner1 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 have thanks, and that is not it. That is a Council Cabinet report, not the adjudication findings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoroB 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 It does make a good read reptep. A couple of areas stand out: First paragraph: 'To respond to concerns over the unfairness caused by lack of clarity of signing at Hillsborough Tramgate' Section 3 - How the council decided to recompense motorists fined due to their signs being unfair and lacking clarity: Affected motorists should apply to the Council for this repayment so that any changes of address or car ownership can be dealt with. Over 13,000 PCNs are affected The council sent out over 13,000 fines to motorists home addresses over an eleven month period. Do the council write to these people at home, to tell them that they have been fined in error and are due a refund? No they keep stum in the hope that people do not claim the repayment they are due. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevo Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 Just had a delivery of new furniture and got talking to one of the guys and he mentioned about parking charges he has had a ticket in the past whilst carrying out a delivery this is just shows how wrong this scheme is someone carrying out their duty of work should not get penalised even the utilities get tickets it is so wrong........come on planner 1 I'm waiting for your response. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannyno Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 That council minute also says: The Adjudicator acknowledgement that the Hillsborough bus/tram gate Traffic Regulation Order was valid and that the signs were legal (although in his opinion unclear), means that there are no specific legal implications arising from the decision. "The council" at that point was Liberal Democrat, Labour having lost control (they opposed any refunds), and they decided to allow refunds if requested. I think it's arguable that ideally everyone fined should have been contacted. But the adjudicator did not say the council had to do that. I assume the council felt it would be too expensive to do so, and so since they did not have to contact everyone, they didn't. However, the case was widely publicised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoroB Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 That council minute also says: "The council" at that point was Liberal Democrat, Labour having lost control (they opposed any refunds), and they decided to allow refunds if requested. I think it's arguable that ideally everyone fined should have been contacted. But the adjudicator did not say the council had to do that. I assume the council felt it would be too expensive to do so, and so since they did not have to contact everyone, they didn't. However, the case was widely publicised. My concern is that the council are quite happy to contact people to tell them about fines that are due but when said fines are deemed unfair by an independent adjudicator who knows what he is doing, the council did not feel it was fair to notify people. Whether the case was widely publicised is irrelevent; the council wrote to people to tell them about fines and should have done so to cancel them. Even the taxman and utility companies tell you when you have overpaid. Still this is the same council that think it is fair to increase parking permits by 260% in little over a 12 month period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eater Sundae Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 My concern is that the council are quite happy to contact people to tell them about fines that are due but when said fines are deemed unfair by an independent adjudicator who knows what he is doing, the council did not feel it was fair to notify people. Whether the case was widely publicised is irrelevent; the council wrote to people to tell them about fines and should have done so to cancel them. Even the taxman and utility companies tell you when you have overpaid. Still this is the same council that think it is fair to increase parking permits by 260% in little over a 12 month period. The adjudicator "who knows what he is doing" didn't tell the council to refund any fines, because he "who knows what he is doing" acknowledged that the fines were legal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andygardener Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 The adjudicator "who knows what he is doing" didn't tell the council to refund any fines, because he "who knows what he is doing" acknowledged that the fines were legal. If the fines were legal then why did the council repay them then? Sounds like they made a complete dogs dinner of things at both ends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Planner1 Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 If the fines were legal then why did the council repay them then? The Lib-Dem administration felt that it was "the right thing to do". They were not legally obliged to pay anything back. When people pay a penalty, they admit that they have made a contravention and give up any right of appeal. ---------- Post added 17-01-2013 at 22:19 ---------- Just had a delivery of new furniture and got talking to one of the guys and he mentioned about parking charges he has had a ticket in the past whilst carrying out a delivery this is just shows how wrong this scheme is someone carrying out their duty of work should not get penalised even the utilities get tickets it is so wrong........come on planner 1 I'm waiting for your response. Did this person did mention where he had parked or what the contravention was? Just because you are doing a job, it does not mean that you can ignore restrictions, they are there for a reason. If he parked in an area with a loading restriction, there can be no argument. Such restrictions are placed where it is undesirable or unsafe to have waiting or loading. If he parked where there was a waiting restriction but no leading restriction, the Civil Enforcement Officers usually allow them 10 minutes or so. If he thought he had been incorrectly penalised, the Penalty Charge Notice sets out his options, which include recourse to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, which is conducted by an independent Adjudicator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyofborg Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 The permit scheme has not solved this issue, just displaced the problem over a wider area. that sort of solves the issue or at least makes it more bearable ultimately there isn't a solution to any of these problems which doesn't require people to use their cars less or get rid of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoroB Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 The Lib-Dem administration felt that it was "the right thing to do". They were not legally obliged to pay anything back. When people pay a penalty, they admit that they have made a contravention and give up any right of appeal. Yes it was the right thing to do but the council only did half a job. The penalties were based on unfair signs, making any action that these led to unfair. Having decided to repay the fines, probably under fear of legal challenge because the signs had been declared unfair by an independent expert, the council should have contacted all connected. They didn't. How many appeals did the council dismiss before somebody appealed to the adjudicator? It seems that what the council consider as fair differs from what ordinary people consider as fair. 260% permit price increase? Perfectly fair per the council. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.