Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Lawful Rebellion / Non Compliance / Sovereignty

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-04-2011, 08:33 PM   #1
sufiashakti
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default PCN and Van Towed

I have only just discovered this website, so need to know what I should do in relation to sending them a demand for my money back, as most of the posts on this website are about not paying THEM...but i actually need to get my MONEY BACK OFF THEM.

Long story short - i got a pcn for parking by dropped kerb and got towed ( i was there when they towed it!). i paid £250 to get it the same day £50 for PCN and £200 for towing fee). I sent the appeal by email and they sent aletter back saying they had statutory duty to reply in 56 days or they woudl cancel the PCN. 56 days passed and they still had not replied, so i sent a letter back demanding my money back - still no reply....When I called them they are saying that the case is closed. I have attached my original letter for what its worth, but surely this is irrelevant now as they have broken the law of 56 days?

ANY EXAMPLES OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE WON CASES LIKE THESE?

Below I have copied in my original letter I snet to the appealing and Also a letter that i wish to send tomorrow based on my reserach into websites like these and other advice: Your wisdom and experience would be gratefully appreciated:

ORIGINAL LETTER APPEALING THEIR PCN AND TOWING FEE - 23 JANUARY 2011

Haringey Council Parking Service
PO Box 4789
Worthing
BN11 9AQ
Dear Sir/Madam,

Re.Appeal towing vehicle ********, PCN number ***********.
I would like to begin by giving an account of the events. On the morning of 06/01/11, my neighbour ******* from ****** Road noticed that the truck had stopped at the junction oF ****** and *** road and the gentlemen were starting to write a PCN for my vehicle and were taking pictures. He immediately came to my house across the road and rang the doorbell for me to come down I shouted out the window for the gentlemen to stop while the vehicle was still firmly on the road, but they wouldn’t.
I ran down the stairs and to my vehicle with my neighbour while the process was taking place. My other neighbour; **** from ***** Road was also looking out of his side window. There was a Caucasian male operating the crane and a black male in the cabin. I pleaded firstly with the Caucasian male who was operating the machine, but he continued to place the vehicle on the tow truck. I then spoke to the black male in the cabin and he said that he had already logged the call with the car pound.
My neighbour; *********8 and I both asked that they return the vehicle to the road as I would pay the ticket, but they said I could only pay the ticket at the car pound and they would take my vehicle there. There were an additional 2 other neighbours observing this taking place.We continued to ask them both to return the vehicle. The CEO’s response to ***** was to say that he should have said something to them before he went to fetch me, which would have made a difference. ****** response was that he tried this on another occasion with another neighbour in the same circumstances, even before the vehicle had left the ground and they still continued to take the vehicle away.
I had to ask for the contact details of the car pound before the Caucasian male wrote this on a scrap of paper. As I said, ***** was present for these proceedings and witnessed the events as they unfolded.
I rang the telephone number they gave me and the male on the other end of the line said he had no record of this and to call back. This contradicts what the black male advised – there was no record he had called, even though he had said he had done so minutes before. I called back 15 minutes later and they advised that they now had the car and I would have to pay a release fee of £250.
I went to the car pound and paid the fee at 13:35. Cashier number #### processed the paperwork at 13:50. It was only here that I received any paperwork in relation to my vehicle being towed: copy of PCN, Receipt of payment and ‘representation against removal of vehicle’ information. I was escorted to my vehicle by a black male with an umbrella who gave me the PCN from the windscreen. I drove my vehicle out for the car pound.
I AM WRITING TO YOU TO APPEAL THE DECISION TO TOW AND REMOVE MY VEHICLE ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS.
In the DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT, TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT ACT 2004, the secretary of state’s statutory guidance to local authorities on the civil enforcement of parking contraventions states:

56. If a driver returns to the vehicle whilst immobilisation or removal is taking place, then unless they are a persistent evader, it is recommended that the operation is halted, unless the clamp is secured or the vehicle has all its wheels aboard the tow truck. If immobilisation or removal is halted the PCN should still be enforced.

• On these grounds, I feel that the vehicle should never have been towed away as I was disputing this before the towing process was complete.

In addition, the first time I sighted the original PCN was at the point I got my vehicle from the car pound and was handed to me by the black male. I note that CEO (number 904) issued this after seeing my vehicle from 07:56 to 08.01. This ticket was issued minutes before they started to tow my vehicle away.
• This raises an issue regarding the speed of removal from the serving of the PCN – AIUI. A different CEO from the one who served the PCN should authorise removal, and certainly the SoS's guidance and Removal and Disposal of Vehicles Regulations 1986 state:

53. The decision on whether to immobilise or to remove a vehicle requires an exercise of judgement and must only be taken following specificauthorisation by an appropriately trained CEO.
• I would like you to investigate the appropriateness of the CEO’s training in relation to this case and would like to see evidence from the council as to who authorised removal and how this person met the "appropriately trained" condition in the Secretary of State's Statutory Guidance.
In relation to the last two points indicated in bold, indicates that there was a lack of judgement from the CEO’s carrying out process. They advised on the 06/01/11 that they would consider not towing if ***** had said he knew me. This contradicts their actions on another incident with the same circumstances, where the very same ****, along with two other neighbours from **** Road contested them towing a vehicle, but they refused. This again highlights a lack of consistency and judgement (see quote 53 above) and I really feel my appeal should be upheld due to this lack of judgement in relation to the decision to tow my vehicle.
It also states in your appeal information sheets that “The statutory grounds for representationare that…. the appropriate period had not lapsed since the PCN was issued in respect of the contravention, being ….-30 minutes”
This was certainly not 30minutes time lapse and this removal should never have been instigated or completed on these grounds.
As advised on your Haringey Council website, the legislation that covers how parking is enforced is made under the Traffic Management Act 2004 (TMA).
The aim of the Guidance is to steer local governments into providing an open and fair parking enforcement policy whilst adopting clear and prescribed guidelines for dealing with parking contraventions.
• I feel that a fair parking policy is not being exercised here. As a resident for a number of years, I have seen the changes that have been made in the neighbourhood. Parking has been increasingly difficult due to the encroachment of CPZ’s in surrounding streets which has had a knock on effect. Finding a parkingspace has been difficult and often we are forced to find spaces that are far from our properties. I have often parked on the corner and evidently this was never a problem at the time. The council introduced a dropped kerb on this junction, without providing local residents with satisfactory advice on the repercussions. I was parked overlapping the dropped kerb, but by no means completely obstructing access to it and pedestrians would still be able to utilise a large part of the dropped kerb area to navigate across the street as you will see from your photographs. Again, an element of judgement should have been exercised here.
I have also read that council areas within Greater London that were awarded Special Parking Area status under section 76 of the Road Traffic Act 1991 are now considered, due to paragraph 1(5) of Schedule 10 within the TMA 2004, to be Special Enforcement Areas.

However, such council areas are not considered as Special Enforcement Areas where Statutory Instrument 2009/1116 is concerned. Paragraph 2(5) of S.I. 2009/1116 does not include paragraph 1(5) of Schedule 10 within the TMA 2004, in its definition of Special Enforcement Areas.

2(5)In paragraph (4) a “special enforcement area” means an area designated as a special enforcement area by means of—
(a) an order made under paragraph 1(1) or 3(1) of Schedule 10 to the Traffic Management Act 2004; or
(b)an order which, by virtue of paragraph 2(5) or 3(5) of that Schedule, has effect as if it were an order so made."

Since S.I. 2009/1116 does not include those councils within Greater London that were granted Special Parking Area status under the 1991 Act, it means that those councils do not qualify as being exempt from having to place traffic signs for the purpose of providing information to road users as to the effect of section 85 (double parking) or 86 (parking adjacent to dropped footways) of the Traffic Management Act 2004 in their area.


• As the prohibition was not signed and no exemption from placing traffic signs has been granted, I require you to cancel the charges forthwith and to immediately cease enforcing the effects of sections 85 & 86 of the TMA 2004 until the appropriate signage is placed or an exemption is enacted by statute.

• I also feel that the payment of the fine with the tow is illegal as it removes my right to appeal. Surely this is not justified?
I would like you to respond to my points raised above, specifically the six bulleted and highlighted in bold in relation to the PCN and vehicle removal. I look forward to hearing from you in relation to refunding the PCN fee and removal fee on the basis of these points.
I look forward to your prompt response
Yours faithfullY

THE LETTER I WISH TO SEND TOMORROW
Haringey Council Parking Service
PO Box 4789
Worthing
BN11 9AQ
Dear **********,

Re.PCN number *************************.
I am writing to you as I have still not received a response to my emails sent on 23 January 2011 and 23 March 2011and subsequent telephone calls to J******, ***** and **** chasing for a response. I was assured by J***** on 31 March 2011 that after speaking to ******and ****** that they would send a response that day and I would receive it no later that 1 April 2011.
I am now issuing a notice to advise you that you have 30 days from the date of this email to return my £250. After this date, I have the right to claim for an application of my own interest rate for every day that you go over. Your retention of my money can only be deemed as theft and I shall be taking this further.
The original paying of the PCN and towing fee was only a conditional acceptance and was made under duress and protest. I will remind you that no one has the right to enforce jurisdiction services on another without the consent of both parties to the adjudication. Equality, before and under the law is mandatory. I gave no consent, therefore have respectfully declined to accept your judgement, I, therefore, require you to return the £250..
To illustrate this, the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulation 1999 and related Statutory Instrument 1999 No. 2083, in particular at section 5 states that unfair terms are:
(1) A contractual term which has not been individually negotiated shall be regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer.
(2) A term shall always be regarded as not having been individually negotiated where it has been drafted in advance and the consumer has therefore not been able to influence the substance of the term.
(3) Notwithstanding that a specific term or certain aspects of it in a contract has been individually negotiated, these Regulations shall apply to the rest of a contract if an overall assessment of it indicates that it is a pre-formulated standard contract.
(4) It shall be for any seller or supplier who claims that a term was individually negotiated to show that it was.
(5) Schedule 2 to these Regulations contains an indicative and non-exhaustive list of the terms which may be regarded as unfair.

There is also the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 that states in section 4 that:
(1) A person dealing as consumer cannot by reference to any contract term be made to indemnify another person (whether a party to the contract or not) in respect of liability that may be incurred by the other for negligence or breach of contract, except in so far as the contract term satisfies the requirement of reasonableness.
(2) This section applies whether the liability in question –
(a) is directly that of the person to be indemnified or is incurred by him vicariously;
(b) is to the person dealing as consumer or to someone else.
I should also highlight that to pre-fine someone in England is contrary with the Bill of Rights Act 1688, "And several Grants and Promises made of Fines and Forfeitures before any Conviction or Judgement against the Persons upon whom the same were to be levied. All which are utterly directly contrary to the known Laws and Statutes and Freedom of this Realm".
In addition, any act which prevents a subject from enjoying their right to travel within the UK is "contrary and inconsistent" with the Acts of Union 1706 and 1707 Article 4 -
"That all the Subjects of the United Kingdom of Great Britain shall from and after the Union have full freedom and Intercourse of Trade and Navigation to and from any port or place within the said United Kingdom and the Dominions and Plantations thereunto belonging And that there be a Communication of all other Rights Privileges and Advantages which do or may belong to the Subjects of either Kingdom except where it is otherwise expressly agreed in these Articles."
and Article 25 -
"That all Laws and Statutes in either Kingdom so far as they are contrary to or inconsistent with the Terms of these Articles or any of them shall from and after the Union cease and become void and shall be so declared to be by the respective Parliaments of the said Kingdoms"
Clearly the charging of £250 is wholly unreasonable.
I have sent an original copy of this letter in the post and look forward to you imminent reply

Yours sincerely
sufiashakti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2011, 09:12 PM   #2
brianthebrain
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,883
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

by paying the fpn, you seem to have accepted it, you didnt need to do that to get your car back, unless they told you you did, in which case you have a case

take your story here

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showforum=30

they will help you, if you can be helped
brianthebrain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2011, 09:16 PM   #3
moobs
Inactive
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,018
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

Well, this is a little off-topic to this forum. You're actually arguing your case based on the statutes. A freeman would advise you to explain to the court that you are exempt from their statutes, send an invoice to the civil enforcement officers who towed your car, and if all else fails, file a lawsuit against them. If you want your $250 back, I strongly encourage you to completely ignore that advice.

Anyway, I'm no lawyer, but I've got to be honest, I don't think the law is on your side. While it sounds like the CEOs were undoubtedly dicks to you, the law seems to give them discretion in choosing whether or not they can tow vehicles. And if they're out on the streets towing vehicles, then they've most likely gone through the appropriate training. What I would suggest is to maybe focus on the time limit for their response. I've known people who got out of paying fines just because of procedural fuck-ups from the government.

Good luck to you, at any rate.
moobs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2011, 09:21 PM   #4
brianthebrain
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,883
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by moobs View Post
Well, this is a little off-topic to this forum. You're actually arguing your case based on the statutes. A freeman would advise you to explain to the court that you are exempt from their statutes, send an invoice to the civil enforcement officers who towed your car, and if all else fails, file a lawsuit against them. If you want your $250 back, I strongly encourage you to completely ignore that advice.

Anyway, I'm no lawyer, but I've got to be honest, I don't think the law is on your side. While it sounds like the CEOs were undoubtedly dicks to you, the law seems to give them discretion in choosing whether or not they can tow vehicles. And if they're out on the streets towing vehicles, then they've most likely gone through the appropriate training. What I would suggest is to maybe focus on the time limit for their response. I've known people who got out of paying fines just because of procedural fuck-ups from the government.

Good luck to you, at any rate.
the parking tickets in the Uk are commonly non compliant with the law, as are a lot of the signs,, the site ive given him are experts at it, if there is a loop hole they will find it

nb Op dont show them your second letter, its bollux

this is your case

I also feel that the payment of the fine with the tow is illegal as it removes my right to appeal. Surely this is not justified?


if its true

Last edited by brianthebrain; 04-04-2011 at 09:24 PM.
brianthebrain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2011, 04:34 PM   #5
britishnick
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

I've not read the full letter, just scanned... sounds like you are being screwed and ignored at the mo, keep hassling them if they've not followed their own procedures then they are in the wrong, plain and simple, surely.

but if you're in Brighton Thursday night we have a meet up with other like minded folk, you are welcome... it's a friendly bunch!

Send me a Private message and I'll give you details ) [click on my name and then click on messge]
__________________
You all owe me a breathing tax - please pay up: http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=103303
freemanpete: "Freedom can't be spoon fed."
vladmir "Being a Freeman [for me] dosent mean one supports anarchy or no government, but a legitimate and limited form of Lawful government is actually what freemen are seeking, not a corporate dictatorship that is currently hijacked into place."
britishnick is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:47 PM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.