Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Illegal Haringey Council Traffic Wardens have been issuing you tickets .... !!
See: Traffic wardens face deportation after raid
No less than fourteen traffic wardens working in Haringey have been found with forged immigration documentation.
Was your last ticket given out by one of them? Surely not!
As has been highlighted recently by our very own site member & Tottenham councillor Alan Stanton via this BBC article, Haringey Council has been known to rake in the money via illegal traffic fines before now.
No less than fourteen traffic wardens working in Haringey have been found with forged immigration documentation.
Was your last ticket given out by one of them? Surely not!
As has been highlighted recently by our very own site member & Tottenham councillor Alan Stanton via this BBC article, Haringey Council has been known to rake in the money via illegal traffic fines before now.
Tags for Forum Posts: penalty charge notices, traffic wardens
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
I don't see that the fact that the person who issued the ticket was working illegally should have anything to do with the validity of the ticket. How many New Zealanders taught in schools here when they were on working holiday visas and should have been providing witty banter behind bars instead?
-
Permalink Reply by james walsh on
-
PCN = PARKING TICKET
I AM IN THE PROCESS OF SUEING HARINGEY COUNCIL FOR HARRASSMENT OVER THEIR BEHAVIOUR WHEN DISMISSING MY CHALLENGES TO INVALIDITY OF PCNs.
THE PCN HAD THE WRONG DETAILS - I CHALLENGED THE COUNCIL - THEY REFUSED TO CANCEL THE PCN - THEN A DATE WAS SET FOR TRIBUNAL - JUST BEFORE THE DUE DATE HARINGEY CANCELLED THE PCN - WHEN I ASKED WHY THEY SAID 'BECAUSE THE PCN WAS ISSUED INCORRECTLY'.
THEY WERE PLAYING 'MEXICAN STAND OFF' WITH ME AND WHEN I DID NOT BACK DOWN THEY DID.
SO THEY KNEW THE PCN WAS INVALID FROM THE START. BUT THEY PILED THE PRESSURE ON BY DOUBLING THE CHARGE EVERY TIME I CHALLENGED.
HENCE - HARRASSMENT.
PLEASE FOLKS - WHENEVER YOU GET A PCN - CHECK THE SPELLING AND EVERYTHING FOR MISTAKES - IF YOU FIND ONE THEN THE PCN IS INVALID.
ALSO JOHN M IS RIGHT - EVEN IF THE GOVERNER OF THE BANK OF ENGLAND IS A CONVICTED CROOK - THE MONEY ISSUED IS STILL LEGAL TENDER.
DON'T JUST PAY IT WITHOUT CHECKING.
(lesbian)
-
Permalink Reply by empyrean_aisles on
-
Not to hijack this thread with frivolous matters, but I am absolutely intrigued to find out what (lesbian) is doing - in brackets no less - in the middle of A VERY VERY LOUD POST.
Dear james walsh, please enlighten us. Was it supposed to go in the search box?
-
Permalink Reply by rahman on
-
Maybe they only realised it was incorrectly issued when their legal team had a look at it prior to the hearing?
-
-
PCN's can't just be doubled everytime you challenge them, it simply doesn't work like that. There is a process defined by law which lays out the life cycle of a PCN and the charges at every stage of that process.
If you are issued with a £100 PCN, then you have the opportunity to pay that notice at a discounted rate of £50 if you pay within a given time. You may appeal informally, during which time the discounted rate is frozen and extended for a period if your informal appeal is rejected.
If you choose to pursue a formal appeal, then you do so at the normal value of the notice, i.e. £100. If you fail in your appeal, you pay the notice at it's proper rate of £100. If you subsequently fail to pay your fine, then there are further charges.
Rahman is more than likely correct, in that the PCN was only examined in detail by a specialist team prior to a PATAS hearing. It is possible that the PCN had evidential flaws about which you knew nothing but which meant an appeals officer was unwilling to appear before the beak with it. If the Notice was issued incorrectly then it should have been cancelled but I guess there is the further quesiton ..... were you parked in contravention or not?
For what it's worth, PATAS is completely independent of councils and parking officers with whom I have spoken feel that PATAS is biased in favour of appellants.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
JPC, I'm sorry to tell you that – to a large extent - it does work like that. And if Parking staff tell you that Adjudicators at PATAS are biased towards motorists, well, "they would say that, wouldn't they."
The situation - across the country - is that far too many local councils have been sloppy and incompetent in running the traffic management system. They've treated it as a 'stealth tax' - losing sight of the fact that the central, sensible aim of these controls is not generating revenue. The goal should be compliance with rules which have benefits including: lower speeds; reduced accidents; better traffic flow (including buses); and allocating scarce parking spaces. The correct test for a well run traffic system is how close it gets to zero fines (PCNs) - because everyone is keeping to the rules.
Across the country, local councils have been caught with lines and signs which don't comply with the Traffic Signs Regulations. They are breaking the law. Some councils apologise, repay fines and correct the faults as quickly as possible. Others ignore their own breaches while happily taking money off motorists for theirs. Councils rely on the fact that most people don't query or appeal a PCN. The vast majority pay up the fifty quid rather than play 'double-or-quits' against an opponent who seems to have all the cards.
Some examples of what happens.
■ Some residents got PCNs which referred to an offence in "Green Lanes"; but without specifying exactly where. Which made it impossible for them to check if the signs and lines were correct. Haringey Parking Service admitted this.
■ Between December 2005 and May 2006, 3,746 PCNs were issued to motorists for two unlawful yellow junction boxes outside Tottenham Bus Garage. On 4 March 2006 staff raised concerns about the validity of these boxes and on 16 March it was confirmed they didn’t comply with Statutory Regulations. Staff were instructed to stop issuing PCNs. From March to May 2006 655 PCNs were issued.
None of the fines on these unlawful boxes was repaid. Despite my request, Cllr Haley the "cabinet" member responsible has never issued a public statement announcing this decision and giving the reasons.
■ Currently, Haringey Parking Service are enforcing against vehicles parked in hundreds of CPZ bays which are wrongly marked. The Parking Service has known about these problems at least since February 2008. But only now are they surveying and correcting the faults.
The most serious issue here is not about Department for Transport Regulations and technical questions of lines and signs. Nor even about how much people pay.
It's the fact that local councils are not and cannot be above the law. When a council makes a mistake the right thing is to honestly admit the error and correct it as quickly as possible. Pretending a problem doesn't exist as long as possible - while the money rolls in - compounds the problem by undermining public confidence in the entire system and the officials who administer it.
As a councillor, I regret to say that I no longer have confidence in the replies I get from the Urban Environment Department on traffic sign issues.
When we learn that a large number of traffic wardens are working illegally on forged documents, what does that do to restore anyone's confidence?
-
-
sorry about the capital letters - i don't see to well - i have now bumped up the page size. i did not know there was a universal font protocol (maybe i should stay in more) ha ha
thanks for clarifying alan.
-
Permalink Reply by matt on
-
As a councillor, I regret to say that I no longer have confidence in the replies I get from the Urban Environment Department on traffic sign issues.
When we learn that a large number of traffic wardens are working illegally on forged documents, what does that do to restore anyone's confidence?
Alan, if you see things are as bad as all that then the rest of us should be very concerned indeed.
-
-
Alan Stanton has always supported me
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
