There appears to be something going on with the contract for NCP and Bolton Council when I requested a contract so I could submit a tender on behalf of Mossy Enterprises (parking solutions made easy) I was told that the Council and NCP are renegotiating the contract, it appears that NCP have changed their name to NCP services and it also appears that there is no authority to issue Penalty Charge Notices by NCP services, it also appears that any PCN's issued in the interim could be unlawful i.e invalid, non compliant, void. will keep you posted when I have more info.
Monday 21 January 2008
More proof against this corrupt council 2 more parking tickets cancelled totalling 4, Sheilas Wheels of Conspiracy, Corruption, Fraud, Deception
Bolton Council Corrupt parking regime have cancelled another 2 Penalty Charge Notices, one because because of the delay in dealing with paperwork and the other one because Mrs Jackson says she has lost the paperwork, if you believe her put yer hand up, not many hands up there then, oh yes just the one, oh, its Mrs Jackson, sorry love you can't vote, voting is only for those who believe in justice, put yourself up for a Councillor love they don't believe in justice either.
Well Sean Harriss, CEO of Bolton Council, what sort of a seedy organisation are you running in Bolton, it has got to be the most Corrupt Parking Regime in Britain and getting worse by the day, but if anyone reading this knows a more corrupt Council let me know, and if you can get any logic round the two letters from Mrs Sheila Jackson here let me know. Copies of these are going to the National Parking Adjudication Service so they can see at first hand how Bolton Council are corrupting the Parking Appeals Process. They really are taking the Pizza.
Anyone reading this and whose PCN is more than 4 months since issue should write to Sheila Jackson and ask for the PCN to be cancelled, send a copy of the letters above and below or if you want a copy I can email, request and you shall have. bmoss@ntlworld.com.
Wednesday 16 January 2008
THE PROOF THAT BOLTON COUNCIL ARE CORRUPT
Please click on the Page to read insert. Attached is a letter from Parking Services run by an incompetent woman by the name of Sheila Jackson, it is Mrs Jackson who runs a Corrupt Parking regime with the blessing of Councillors and Council Officers, Alan Eastwood, Malcolm Cox and the CEO Sean Harrass who appears to do very little but oversee the running of this Corrupt Council. read the attach letter and see if you can understand the rantings of a totally illogical woman who is running of all things a Parking Services. She has used a decision in an appeal that did not exist and was never ever brought to light to cancel two Parking Tickets both of which were mine, she has corrupted the appeal process by lying on Bolton Council headed notepaper, does she think we are stupid.
Tuesday 15 January 2008
Costs Awarded Against BOLTON COUNCIL
Please click on the page images to read.
This Corrupt Council that is Bolton has had costs awarded against it by NPAS, this may be a first for costs awarded regarding a no contest plea by any council. Bolton Council gave a no contest plea to an appeal regarding Mr John Burns.
I first got involved with Mr Burns when he phoned me for help as he had received a Parking ticket in a Taxi Bay in Knowsley St Bolton. I checked the bay and confirmed the bay did not comply with the TSRGD's. (nothing new there then in Bolton) Mr Burns had already exchanged several letters with the council who gave the two fingers to him basically saying we want our £60, John came down to my house and we spent a few hours compiling a defence, we had got the info back from NPAS giving the date of the appeal and a copy of Bolton Councils Defence came the week before appeal day. Then with just days to go Mr Burns received a letter from NPAS informing him that Bolton Council had put in a NO CONTEST plea so there was no need to go to appeal, a victory but an Hollow one, it transpires that this Corrupt Bolton council found out I was involved and didn't want to take me on because they knew they would lose the appeal. I phoned NPAS and asked for what reasons did the council enter a No Contest plea, they said the Council gave no reasons, at this news I put the wheels in motion for a review to force the council to the appeal procedure, I knew this could not happen but it laid the foundations for a costs award for not revealing a reason for No Contest plea, I again wrote to NPAS on behalf of John asking for cost and damages for stress and anxiety about £200, but they said they would not allow an award for damages and if a realistic amount was submitted he would look at it. I entered £46 for Johns costs and submitted this and on Saturday John received this enclosed important letter from Mr Stephen Knapp informing him that costs had been awarded against Bolton Council of £46, this is one in the eye for this corrupt council and hopefully others who read this can take heart that Councils cannot take an appeal to the wire then suddenly back out without giving a reason, and expect not to be punished, Thank you Mr Knapp.
If you require a copy of the decision in PDF format please reply to this blog leaving your email address and I will send the PDF to you. or email me at bmoss@ntlworld.com.
I first got involved with Mr Burns when he phoned me for help as he had received a Parking ticket in a Taxi Bay in Knowsley St Bolton. I checked the bay and confirmed the bay did not comply with the TSRGD's. (nothing new there then in Bolton) Mr Burns had already exchanged several letters with the council who gave the two fingers to him basically saying we want our £60, John came down to my house and we spent a few hours compiling a defence, we had got the info back from NPAS giving the date of the appeal and a copy of Bolton Councils Defence came the week before appeal day. Then with just days to go Mr Burns received a letter from NPAS informing him that Bolton Council had put in a NO CONTEST plea so there was no need to go to appeal, a victory but an Hollow one, it transpires that this Corrupt Bolton council found out I was involved and didn't want to take me on because they knew they would lose the appeal. I phoned NPAS and asked for what reasons did the council enter a No Contest plea, they said the Council gave no reasons, at this news I put the wheels in motion for a review to force the council to the appeal procedure, I knew this could not happen but it laid the foundations for a costs award for not revealing a reason for No Contest plea, I again wrote to NPAS on behalf of John asking for cost and damages for stress and anxiety about £200, but they said they would not allow an award for damages and if a realistic amount was submitted he would look at it. I entered £46 for Johns costs and submitted this and on Saturday John received this enclosed important letter from Mr Stephen Knapp informing him that costs had been awarded against Bolton Council of £46, this is one in the eye for this corrupt council and hopefully others who read this can take heart that Councils cannot take an appeal to the wire then suddenly back out without giving a reason, and expect not to be punished, Thank you Mr Knapp.
If you require a copy of the decision in PDF format please reply to this blog leaving your email address and I will send the PDF to you. or email me at bmoss@ntlworld.com.
Thursday 10 January 2008
Mr K Jalali V Bolton Council
This adjudica
tion was heard on 14th Decem
ber and I had a hard job convincing the adjudicator that the bay in the picture was unlawful, he was the type of guy who just because there is a bit of paint on the Tarmac that looks like it was a bay then it must be a bay, however as the Adjudicator Mr Mark Hinchcliffe did not have a copy of the TSRGD's with him and I had my copy, I was able to prove that the bay did not exist in Law therefore it was unlawful, of which the DfT agreed with. Mr Hichcliffe was a biased ajudicator and made appellants feel that they were on test and not the Council, in a fit of Pique he had a go at the selfish motorist who park illegally, may I remind Mr Hinchcliffe and the Council, it is not illegal to park in an unlawful bay. The pictures are before and after the Council Changed the bay.
The Following day I sent a letter to NPAS complaining that Mr Hinchcliffe was not qualified to continue as an adjudicator as he had made several errors in law and did not have the necessary reference material required for an appeal to be heard justly and fairly.
I can send a PDF copy of the adjudication or read it here.
National Parking Adjudication Service Case No: BO 05375E
Adjudicator’s Decision
Mr Keivan Jalali-Bijari and Bolton Metropolitan Council
Penalty Charge Notice BO61050311 Penalty Charge £60.00
Appeal allowed on the ground that the alleged parking contravention did not occur.
I direct the Council to cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and Notice to Owner.
Reasons:
The PCN was issued on 02 September 2007 at 16:32 to vehicle MT51 KKV in Mawdsley Street
for being parked in a loading place during restricted hours without loading.
In a remarkable email from the Appellant to the Council dated 25/10/07, Mr Jalali-Bijari accepts that he parked in a loading bay – albeit, he says, for only 10 minutes. Nevertheless, he resolved to exercise his right to appeal and, when composing his email, indicated that he would reveal no more details of his grounds of appeal until the hearing. This strategy had, I was told, been successful for other motorists in Bolton. The Council sent a Notice of Rejection.
Mr Jalali-Bijari’s Notice of Appeal, however, raised an issue in advance of the hearing, albeit one
which I find to be without merit. Mr Jalali-Bijari asserted that the PCN failed to comply with
S66(3) of the Road Traffic Act 1991 because, he says, instructions for payment appeared on the
tear-off slip. The papers contain a full copy of the PCN. The instructions for payment are, in fact, on the back of the PCN itself.
At the hearing, the Appellant raised a new point. I considered whether to adjourn the case, but
since Bolton Council had chosen not to attend, and since the point raised seemed to be
unanswerable, I decided not to adjourn.
Mr Jalali-Bijari demonstrated that the markings of the bay on 2/9/07 were inconsistent with the requirements of the Traffic Signs Regulations 2002. Recently, the bay has been re-painted
correctly. I have photographs in the file of ‘before’ and after’.
In my judgment, the potential for confusion is, in this case, miniscule. The bay is clearly a
loading bay, and it is manifestly clear from Mr Jalali’s email that he knew it was a loading bay,
and he was not confused at all by the signage.
However, save for de minimis variations, the design of signs, and marked-out bays on the road,
must comply with the regulations.
I therefore have to ask myself - is the double line at the end of this bay a de minimis variation?
An email dated 5/10/07 from an official in the Dept for Transport to a Mr Moss (in relation to a
different, but similar case) described an identical instance of incorrect marking, where the end of
the bay is wrongly marked with a double white line instead of a single white line, as “an unlawful
hybrid of 1028.4 and 1032 which does not conform to a single diagram in TSRDG 2002”. The
official (john.munns@dft.gsi.gov.uk) will presumably have chosen his words with care, and be
aware of the implications of such a rigid analysis, and the use of the word ‘unlawful’. If a bay
design is ‘unlawful’, it is clearly unenforceable and, consequently, anyone can park there
(without doing any loading or unloading) for as long as they like – which is clearly a recipe for
chaos, and to the great detriment of the people and businesses in the area who need ready
access to a loading bay unencumbered by selfish motorists who park there with no intention of
loading or unloading.
I was shown what appears to be evidence that, in May 07, Mawdsley St was on a list of
highways requiring attention due to lines having sustained “wear + tear”. It has now been repainted correctly. I have also considered the wording of the PCN, the Notice to Owner and the
Notice of Rejection, and have found the wording of all these documents to be unobjectionable. I
therefore find the various additional points raised at the hearing in relation to these matters to be entirely without merit.
Solely because, at the time the PCN was issued, the Loading Bay marking did not strictly
comply with regulations, I have decided to allow the appeal.
Mark Hinchliffe
Parking Adjudicator appointed under Section 73 of the Road Traffic Act 1991
Date: 16 December 2007
tion was heard on 14th Decem
ber and I had a hard job convincing the adjudicator that the bay in the picture was unlawful, he was the type of guy who just because there is a bit of paint on the Tarmac that looks like it was a bay then it must be a bay, however as the Adjudicator Mr Mark Hinchcliffe did not have a copy of the TSRGD's with him and I had my copy, I was able to prove that the bay did not exist in Law therefore it was unlawful, of which the DfT agreed with. Mr Hichcliffe was a biased ajudicator and made appellants feel that they were on test and not the Council, in a fit of Pique he had a go at the selfish motorist who park illegally, may I remind Mr Hinchcliffe and the Council, it is not illegal to park in an unlawful bay. The pictures are before and after the Council Changed the bay.The Following day I sent a letter to NPAS complaining that Mr Hinchcliffe was not qualified to continue as an adjudicator as he had made several errors in law and did not have the necessary reference material required for an appeal to be heard justly and fairly.
I can send a PDF copy of the adjudication or read it here.
National Parking Adjudication Service Case No: BO 05375E
Adjudicator’s Decision
Mr Keivan Jalali-Bijari and Bolton Metropolitan Council
Penalty Charge Notice BO61050311 Penalty Charge £60.00
Appeal allowed on the ground that the alleged parking contravention did not occur.
I direct the Council to cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and Notice to Owner.
Reasons:
The PCN was issued on 02 September 2007 at 16:32 to vehicle MT51 KKV in Mawdsley Street
for being parked in a loading place during restricted hours without loading.
In a remarkable email from the Appellant to the Council dated 25/10/07, Mr Jalali-Bijari accepts that he parked in a loading bay – albeit, he says, for only 10 minutes. Nevertheless, he resolved to exercise his right to appeal and, when composing his email, indicated that he would reveal no more details of his grounds of appeal until the hearing. This strategy had, I was told, been successful for other motorists in Bolton. The Council sent a Notice of Rejection.
Mr Jalali-Bijari’s Notice of Appeal, however, raised an issue in advance of the hearing, albeit one
which I find to be without merit. Mr Jalali-Bijari asserted that the PCN failed to comply with
S66(3) of the Road Traffic Act 1991 because, he says, instructions for payment appeared on the
tear-off slip. The papers contain a full copy of the PCN. The instructions for payment are, in fact, on the back of the PCN itself.
At the hearing, the Appellant raised a new point. I considered whether to adjourn the case, but
since Bolton Council had chosen not to attend, and since the point raised seemed to be
unanswerable, I decided not to adjourn.
Mr Jalali-Bijari demonstrated that the markings of the bay on 2/9/07 were inconsistent with the requirements of the Traffic Signs Regulations 2002. Recently, the bay has been re-painted
correctly. I have photographs in the file of ‘before’ and after’.
In my judgment, the potential for confusion is, in this case, miniscule. The bay is clearly a
loading bay, and it is manifestly clear from Mr Jalali’s email that he knew it was a loading bay,
and he was not confused at all by the signage.
However, save for de minimis variations, the design of signs, and marked-out bays on the road,
must comply with the regulations.
I therefore have to ask myself - is the double line at the end of this bay a de minimis variation?
An email dated 5/10/07 from an official in the Dept for Transport to a Mr Moss (in relation to a
different, but similar case) described an identical instance of incorrect marking, where the end of
the bay is wrongly marked with a double white line instead of a single white line, as “an unlawful
hybrid of 1028.4 and 1032 which does not conform to a single diagram in TSRDG 2002”. The
official (john.munns@dft.gsi.gov.uk) will presumably have chosen his words with care, and be
aware of the implications of such a rigid analysis, and the use of the word ‘unlawful’. If a bay
design is ‘unlawful’, it is clearly unenforceable and, consequently, anyone can park there
(without doing any loading or unloading) for as long as they like – which is clearly a recipe for
chaos, and to the great detriment of the people and businesses in the area who need ready
access to a loading bay unencumbered by selfish motorists who park there with no intention of
loading or unloading.
I was shown what appears to be evidence that, in May 07, Mawdsley St was on a list of
highways requiring attention due to lines having sustained “wear + tear”. It has now been repainted correctly. I have also considered the wording of the PCN, the Notice to Owner and the
Notice of Rejection, and have found the wording of all these documents to be unobjectionable. I
therefore find the various additional points raised at the hearing in relation to these matters to be entirely without merit.
Solely because, at the time the PCN was issued, the Loading Bay marking did not strictly
comply with regulations, I have decided to allow the appeal.
Mark Hinchliffe
Parking Adjudicator appointed under Section 73 of the Road Traffic Act 1991
Date: 16 December 2007
James Keiller v Bolton Council October 2007
The above was an appeal heard on 26th October 2007, this was an adjudication Mr Keiller could not lose, yet Bolton Council Spent nearly £1000 defending the appeal of which they would have received only £60 had they won, yet it was only the conceited legal dept who thought they could overturn an high court ruling. the Barrister Mr Hunter from Kings Chambers Manchester was given a good rattling by Mr Stephen Knapp the Adjudicator.
Bolton council used a Barrister because they thought if they could convince the Adjudicator that the PCN's they issued were legal because there was only a date of issue on the PCN and no date of Contravention they would be able to hold onto around £6M of income taken unlawfully, but as Bolton council were the only ones who believed that they could win the appeal spent good taxpayers money defending the indefensible. however they are obliged by law to issue restitution plus interest. If you or anyone you know had received a parking ticket before August 22nd 2006 you can now get your money back. phone me on 01942 818687 for more information or email me on bmoss@ntlworld.com for a template letter.
Bolton council used a Barrister because they thought if they could convince the Adjudicator that the PCN's they issued were legal because there was only a date of issue on the PCN and no date of Contravention they would be able to hold onto around £6M of income taken unlawfully, but as Bolton council were the only ones who believed that they could win the appeal spent good taxpayers money defending the indefensible. however they are obliged by law to issue restitution plus interest. If you or anyone you know had received a parking ticket before August 22nd 2006 you can now get your money back. phone me on 01942 818687 for more information or email me on bmoss@ntlworld.com for a template letter.
Darley Street Farnworth
Yes!!! there are supposed to be double yellow lines running up from the white line at the bottom of the Picture and running under the wheels of the white van on the right of the road joining up with the yellow lines further on. Bolton Council have been informed about this lack of signage and have been asked to cease enforcement until the signing complies with statute. If anyone reading this has been given a ticket in Darley St you should put in for a refund as the TRO is not in use because of the lack of signing. I think I may just go down there next week and invite a Parking Attendent to give me a ticket.New Knee
Sincere apologies for lack of posts on here since having my new knee fitted.
I got a very serious infection and was in Hospital for 10 days over the Xmas period, however after having 67 bags of broad spectrum Antibitocs dripping into me the aggressive treatment brought the infection under control, after isolating the last of the offending bacteria I was discharged on 31st December taking home nearly 600 differet penicillin tablets, I came out with a severe cold, the first cold I have had for many a year, this minor irritant floored me for a further 10 days and I am now just beginning to regain my strength back to what it was pre op.
So it is all systems go against this Corrupt Bolton Council.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
