FPN - Blood Robbing Council

[carinaman]

Good work!

[Ken Figenus]

Great determined result mate.

Now for the greater good - can it be applied to others? Can those that tried to extort money by deception have any comeuppance? Its not just 'human error' or an honest mistake is it? And the documented change to signage helps proves it?

[zarjaz1991]

Sad thing is, they'll simply put up the council tax to cover any shortfall. They always win in the end.

[anonymous-user]

Good result and well done OP.

zarjaz1991 said:

Sad thing is, they'll simply put up the council tax to cover any shortfall. They always win in the end.

I can see it now. "This chap appealed against an FPN and won. We need this £50 (or whatever) back. Quick raise the Council Tax!"

[zarjaz1991]

La Liga said:

can see it now. "This chap appealed against an FPN and won. We need this £50 (or whatever) back. Quick raise the Council Tax!"

I'm thinking more of this from few posts back:

Stickyfinger said:

This happened in Bath.....they had to bay back many 100's of £1000's of pounds....GOOD JOB !

Shoukd that happen, you can bet they will increase the council tax to cover it.

[Stickyfinger]

zarjaz1991 said:

Shoukd that happen, you can bet they will increase the council tax to cover it.

The Bath one was great, they put the no entry sigh behind another then put a camera behind that

[Vipers]

bad company said:

Well I appealed to London Borough of Newham which was predictably refused so I took the appeal to the tribunal in London. The appeal was heard yesterday and I WON!!!!

The decision was based on the signs being wrong and the council admitting (from a Freedom Of Information) request that the sign was not corrected until after the event.

Well done good to hear, out of interest what signage did they change, is it still a no entry.

[bad company]

Vipers said:

Well done good to hear, out of interest what signage did they change, is it still a no entry.

If you look at the pictures posted by Rich888 the 2nd picy no longer directs traffic to Leyton, Leytonstone & into the 'trap'.

[jogger1976]

Having had the "pleasure" of being seconded to a local council as part of a previous role, I can say that I wouldn't put a stunt like this past local Councillors.

One particular one I remember was a newly installed bus lane, which started just after you came round a rather sharp bend over a railway bridge The layout meant that if you didn't want to be snapped by the conveniently placed camera you'd have to virtually cut up traffic in the next lane.

After many accidents, fines complaints and a campaign by the local rag the lane was repainted and moved further down past the bend.

[rich888]

rewc said:

bad company said:

Well I appealed to London Borough of Newham which was predictably refused so I took the appeal to the tribunal in London. The appeal was heard yesterday and I WON!!!!

The decision was based on the signs being wrong and the council admitting (from a Freedom Of Information) request that the sign was not corrected until after the event.

What punishment did the council receive for this deception other than loosing your penalty payment? Surely the persons who carried out the enforcement and the one who refused your appeal are guilty of some criminal offence?

Well done indeed for pursuing what was a quite legitimate claim against them, but isn't it a crying shame that 'them' continue on regardless.

The problem I see with all these government departments and 'other' publicly funded organisations is that no one person is personally held responsible and sacked for gross incompetence or sent down for fraudulent behaviour, and quite frankly, that is what is needed to happen to make them sit up, pay attention, and do their jobs properly, and the same goes for the Inland Revenue and the Police. They seem to do just what the hell they want and to hell with everyone else, because in a nutshell, they are pretty much untouchable, and this is all so wrong.

In the meantime I assume that every motorist will have this particular fine AUTOMATICALLY cancelled and refunded by the council.

[herewego]

rich888 said:

rewc said:

bad company said:

Well I appealed to London Borough of Newham which was predictably refused so I took the appeal to the tribunal in London. The appeal was heard yesterday and I WON!!!!

The decision was based on the signs being wrong and the council admitting (from a Freedom Of Information) request that the sign was not corrected until after the event.

What punishment did the council receive for this deception other than loosing your penalty payment? Surely the persons who carried out the enforcement and the one who refused your appeal are guilty of some criminal offence?

Well done indeed for pursuing what was a quite legitimate claim against them, but isn't it a crying shame that 'them' continue on regardless.

The problem I see with all these government departments and 'other' publicly funded organisations is that no one person is personally held responsible and sacked for gross incompetence or sent down for fraudulent behaviour, and quite frankly, that is what is needed to happen to make them sit up, pay attention, and do their jobs properly, and the same goes for the Inland Revenue and the Police. They seem to do just what the hell they want and to hell with everyone else, because in a nutshell, they are pretty much untouchable, and this is all so wrong.

In the meantime I assume that every motorist will have this particular fine AUTOMATICALLY cancelled and refunded by the council.

What was the fraudulent behaviour in this case?

[rich888]

herewego said:

rich888 said:

rewc said:

bad company said:

Well I appealed to London Borough of Newham which was predictably refused so I took the appeal to the tribunal in London. The appeal was heard yesterday and I WON!!!!

The decision was based on the signs being wrong and the council admitting (from a Freedom Of Information) request that the sign was not corrected until after the event.

What punishment did the council receive for this deception other than loosing your penalty payment? Surely the persons who carried out the enforcement and the one who refused your appeal are guilty of some criminal offence?

Well done indeed for pursuing what was a quite legitimate claim against them, but isn't it a crying shame that 'them' continue on regardless.

The problem I see with all these government departments and 'other' publicly funded organisations is that no one person is personally held responsible and sacked for gross incompetence or sent down for fraudulent behaviour, and quite frankly, that is what is needed to happen to make them sit up, pay attention, and do their jobs properly, and the same goes for the Inland Revenue and the Police. They seem to do just what the hell they want and to hell with everyone else, because in a nutshell, they are pretty much untouchable, and this is all so wrong.

In the meantime I assume that every motorist will have this particular fine AUTOMATICALLY cancelled and refunded by the council.

What was the fraudulent behaviour in this case?

Look up the definition of 'fraudulent' and there is your answer

Or to save you the time, here's the definition following a Google search, and select whichever you think is appropriate:

fraudulent
ˈfrɔːdjʊl(ə)nt/
adjective
obtained, done by, or involving deception, especially criminal deception.
"fraudulent share dealing"
unjustifiably claiming or being credited with particular accomplishments or qualities.
"fraudulent psychics"
synonyms: dishonest, cheating, swindling, corrupt, criminal, illegal, unlawful, illicit, against the law; deceitful, double-dealing, duplicitous, Janus-faced, dishonourable, unscrupulous, unfair, unjust, unethical, unprincipled; informalcrooked, sharp, shady, tricky, shifty, dirty; informalbent, dodgy; informalshonky
"he was convicted of fraudulent share dealing"

[herewego]

rich888 said:

herewego said:

rich888 said:

rewc said:

bad company said:

Well I appealed to London Borough of Newham which was predictably refused so I took the appeal to the tribunal in London. The appeal was heard yesterday and I WON!!!!

The decision was based on the signs being wrong and the council admitting (from a Freedom Of Information) request that the sign was not corrected until after the event.

What punishment did the council receive for this deception other than loosing your penalty payment? Surely the persons who carried out the enforcement and the one who refused your appeal are guilty of some criminal offence?

Well done indeed for pursuing what was a quite legitimate claim against them, but isn't it a crying shame that 'them' continue on regardless.

The problem I see with all these government departments and 'other' publicly funded organisations is that no one person is personally held responsible and sacked for gross incompetence or sent down for fraudulent behaviour, and quite frankly, that is what is needed to happen to make them sit up, pay attention, and do their jobs properly, and the same goes for the Inland Revenue and the Police. They seem to do just what the hell they want and to hell with everyone else, because in a nutshell, they are pretty much untouchable, and this is all so wrong.

In the meantime I assume that every motorist will have this particular fine AUTOMATICALLY cancelled and refunded by the council.

What was the fraudulent behaviour in this case?

Look up the definition of 'fraudulent' and there is your answer

Or to save you the time, here's the definition following a Google search, and select whichever you think is appropriate:

fraudulent
?fr??dj?l(?)nt/
adjective
obtained, done by, or involving deception, especially criminal deception.
"fraudulent share dealing"
unjustifiably claiming or being credited with particular accomplishments or qualities.
"fraudulent psychics"
synonyms: dishonest, cheating, swindling, corrupt, criminal, illegal, unlawful, illicit, against the law; deceitful, double-dealing, duplicitous, Janus-faced, dishonourable, unscrupulous, unfair, unjust, unethical, unprincipled; informalcrooked, sharp, shady, tricky, shifty, dirty; informalbent, dodgy; informalshonky
"he was convicted of fraudulent share dealing"

Could you answer the question?

[rich888]

herewego said:

rich888 said:

herewego said:

rich888 said:

rewc said:

bad company said:

Well I appealed to London Borough of Newham which was predictably refused so I took the appeal to the tribunal in London. The appeal was heard yesterday and I WON!!!!

The decision was based on the signs being wrong and the council admitting (from a Freedom Of Information) request that the sign was not corrected until after the event.

What punishment did the council receive for this deception other than loosing your penalty payment? Surely the persons who carried out the enforcement and the one who refused your appeal are guilty of some criminal offence?

Well done indeed for pursuing what was a quite legitimate claim against them, but isn't it a crying shame that 'them' continue on regardless.

The problem I see with all these government departments and 'other' publicly funded organisations is that no one person is personally held responsible and sacked for gross incompetence or sent down for fraudulent behaviour, and quite frankly, that is what is needed to happen to make them sit up, pay attention, and do their jobs properly, and the same goes for the Inland Revenue and the Police. They seem to do just what the hell they want and to hell with everyone else, because in a nutshell, they are pretty much untouchable, and this is all so wrong.

In the meantime I assume that every motorist will have this particular fine AUTOMATICALLY cancelled and refunded by the council.

What was the fraudulent behaviour in this case?

Look up the definition of 'fraudulent' and there is your answer

Or to save you the time, here's the definition following a Google search, and select whichever you think is appropriate:

fraudulent
?fr??dj?l(?)nt/
adjective
obtained, done by, or involving deception, especially criminal deception.
"fraudulent share dealing"
unjustifiably claiming or being credited with particular accomplishments or qualities.
"fraudulent psychics"
synonyms: dishonest, cheating, swindling, corrupt, criminal, illegal, unlawful, illicit, against the law; deceitful, double-dealing, duplicitous, Janus-faced, dishonourable, unscrupulous, unfair, unjust, unethical, unprincipled; informalcrooked, sharp, shady, tricky, shifty, dirty; informalbent, dodgy; informalshonky
"he was convicted of fraudulent share dealing"

Could you answer the question?

I just have done

[Red Devil]

A fraud charge would never fly imo. The proper route is misfeasance in public office. If only there was someone with sufficient cojones and deep enough pockets. That would really concentrate the minds of the incompetent petty bureaucrats in town and city halls everywhere.

[bad company]

I agree that a fraud charge would never work. I am contacting the local newspaper to see if they are interested though.

[bad company]

I agree that a fraud charge would never work. I am contacting the local newspaper to see if they are interested though.

[All that jazz]

bad company said:

I agree that a fraud charge would never work. I am contacting the local newspaper to see if they are interested though.

Congrats on the outcome! Defo contact the paper - publicity like that will hit back at the council just as hard once other people that have been caught there see it and demand a refund.

[SVTRick]

bad company said:

Well I appealed to London Borough of Newham which was predictably refused so I took the appeal to the tribunal in London. The appeal was heard yesterday and I WON!!!!

The decision was based on the signs being wrong and the council admitting (from a Freedom Of Information) request that the sign was not corrected until after the event.

Well done mate for standing up to these muppets and their spy scameras.
Its shame that this type of covert stuff is not more widely used against Fly Tippers, and Benefit Cheats and perhaps Cash 4 Crash claimants.

Any way good on you for standing up, making your point and getting justice.

[funkyrobot]

bad company said:

I agree that a fraud charge would never work. I am contacting the local newspaper to see if they are interested though.