Scooter in Bus lane PCN

[Arniej]

Hi

I hope someone can help me out of this mess.

ON Monday 12/03/2012 I received two PCN's for riding my scooter in a bus lane which I returned "No contract". Since then I have received a further three more PCN's for riding my scooter in the same bus lane on different days and returned them "No contract".

Since Monday 12/03/2012 I have not been in the bus lane but I am now worried that I will get more PCN's up until the 12/03/2012.

Am I doing the right thing returning them "No contract" and what should I do next ?

I would be grateful for any advise on how to deal with this matter.

Thanks

[ceylon]

look in parking tickets there is loads of info in there

[robfreeman]

Arnie, got my mate out of paying a PCN last year for £90.Although his was for a "parking violation" [ooohh!] he only sent it back with a short note and never heard from them again.Might be good for you if they come to your home address.The car is registered to him only.All I did for him was send the notice back [ncrts] with a small note saying that it was not him driving that particular day and time,and so the "bill" is not his so please stop harassing him,or they would become liable.Also noted was that he wouldn't volunteer any info as to who was driving,and there was no obligation to do so.Now they were fooked,because firstly they must identify just who was driving by getting a name in order to go to court.Just cos my mate is reg keeper,doesn't mean he was driving that day.Without an eyewitness,how can anyone say in court 100% it was YOU riding,even better you have an helmet on pal.No-one not even police can make you say who was,as there has been no crime committed.The burden of proof is on them to prove IT WAS YOU riding,not the other way round.Just an idea bro that works for us.Cheers bro

[Arniej]

Hi All

I have replied to all the PCN's with " No contract "

I received two letters regarding two of the PCN's saying " I have noted your comments, and after reviewing your case the PCN's still stand" and three updated PCN's increasing the cost to £130 for each one. So I still have five outstanding.

I am just about to send this Notice off to them and would like anyone's views/advice before I send it.

Many thanks.

NOTICE TO RECTIFY YOUR ERROR




Date:

Re: PENALTY CHARGE NOTICES

MT55026347 MT55019749 MT55020930 MT55019228 MT55026267

Dear Parking Services

I am writing with regard to Penalty Charge Notices
MT55026347 MT55019749 MT55020930 MT55019228 MT55026267
for which I have recently received your communication.

I am formally contesting the validity of the PCN’s as I believe that no individual company has the right to demand money from me for an alleged offence which has not been proven in a Court of Law as stated in section 12 of the Bill of Rights Act 1689 enacted and formally entered into Statute following the Declaration of Rights 1689:
“That all Grants and Promises of Fines and Forfeitures of particular persons before Conviction are illegal and void.”

This states that a conviction in a court of law is necessary before a fine or forfeit can be imposed. As you will be aware, the Bill of Rights is a "constitutional statue" and may not be repealed impliedly, as stated in the "Metric Martyrs" Judgment in the Divisional Court (18th February 2002) by Lord Justice Laws and Mr. Justice Crane, A copy of the judgment's relevant sections 62 and 63 follows:
62. "We should recognise a hierarchy of Acts of Parliament: as it were "ordinary" statutes and "constitutional statutes." The special status of constitutional statutes follows the special status of constitutional rights. Examples are the . . . Bill of Rights 1689 . . ."
63. "Ordinary statutes may be impliedly repealed. Constitutional statutes may not . . ."
On 21 July 1993, the Speaker of The House of Commons issued a reminder to the courts. Betty Boothroyd said: "There has of course been no amendment to The Bill of Rights . . . the House is entitled to expect that The Bill of Rights will be fully respected by all those appearing before the courts."
Therefore, it may appear that Merton Borough Council and its agents have no legal or lawful authority to demand money for an alleged infringement that has not been dealt with by a Court of Law with a judge and jury.

I also draw your attention to The Administration of Justice Act 1970.
Section 40 of the act provides that a person commits an offence if, with the object of coercing another person to pay money claimed from the other as a debt due under contract, he or she:
(a) harasses the other with demands for payment which by their frequency, or the manner or occasion of their making, or any accompanying threat or publicity are calculated to subject him or his family or household to alarm, distress or humiliation;
(b) falsely represents, in relation to the money claimed, that criminal proceedings lie for failure to pay it;
(c) falsely represent themselves to be authorised in some official capacity to claim or enforce payment;
(d) utters a document falsely represented by him to have some official character or purporting to have some official character which he knows it has not.
Paragraph (a) above does not apply to anything done by a person which is reasonable (and otherwise legal) for the purpose of :
(1) of securing the discharge of an obligation due, or believed by him to be due, to himself or to persons for whom he acts, or protecting himself or them from future loss; or
(2) of the enforcement of any liability by legal process.
It is also provided that a person may be guilty of an offence under paragraph (a) above if he concerts with others in the taking of such action as is described in that paragraph, notwithstanding that his own course of conduct does not by itself amount to harassment.

Please be mindful that producing misleading, aggressive and threatening contractual business offers designed to appear as a fine in order to frighten and coerce the recipient into paying without issue is not lawful.

What gives you the right under Common Law to demand money from me using what could be viewed as a threatening letter?

Who are you as there is no personal signature?

I would therefore like to give you the opportunity to rectify your error by cancelling all the above Penalty Charge Notice’s and in return I shall agree to end the matter there.


I hereby give you TEN (10) days from the date of this Notice to respond to the above and look forward to hearing from you.

Yours faithfully

[darrell4165]

looks ok to me mate!need a pro to look at it though to be sure!!!

[darrell4165]

looks ok to me mate!need a pro to look at it though to be sure!!!how did u get on with it out of intrest lol ive just seen the date you posted it???