Request from Robin Decrittenden for a line of questions for the Lord Chancellor from members of the public:
1. Why did the Adjudicator prevent the recording of the proceedings -
WHEN THE LITERATURE & SERVICE CHARTER OF NPAS CLEARLY STATE THAT PROCEEDINGS MAY BE RECORDED!
WHAT CAN IT BE THAT NPAS & ITS ADJUDICATORS WISH TO HIDE FROM THE GENERAL PUBLIC - & WHAT DEFENCE CAN THE LORD CHANCELLOR OFFER TO THE VERY SERIOUS PUBLIC ALLEGATION THAT IS FOLLOWING ON FROM THE EVENTS
OF 18th NOVEMBER - ie. THAT IT MUST BE THE GOVERNMENT ITSELF THAT IS TRYING TO PREVENT THE PUBLIC FROM RECEIVING THE INFORMATION THAT THE PUBLIC IS ENTITLED TO HAVE!
2. Can the Lord Chancellor explain why it is that a Senior Official of NPAS failed to attend and give evidence to a tribunal hearing, in response to the evidence offered to the tribunal which confirmed that the official concerned had made wilful attempts to prejudice the conduct & result of the tribunal -
BEARING IN MIND THAT THE ADJUDICATOR APPOINTED BY THE LORD CHANCELLOR WAS OPENLY & PUBLICLY ASKED TO ISSUE A WITNESS ORDER REQUIRING THE ATTENDANCE OF THE OFFENDING OFFICIAL -AND REFUSED TO ISSUE THE REQUIRED ORDER!
Are NPAS Officials and Adjudicators now conspiring together to prevent the proper administration of justice &/or to pervert the course of justice -
AND WILL THE LORD CHANCELLOR NOW DIRECT THAT FULL RECORDING FACILITIES BE ALLOWED TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AT ALL NPAS TRIBUNAL HEARINGS, FROM THIS TIME FORWARD?
3. Can the Lord Chancellor confirm that a full investigation into the disgraceful conduct of Caroline Sheppard, NPAS Chief Adjudicator & Andrew Barfoot, NPAS Tribunal Manager, will now take place - as a result of the evidence of misconduct that is now entered into the proceedings of an NPAS tribunal -
and in accordance with the formal request that was made to the adjudicator, by the appellant, during this tribunal hearing ?
and will the Lord Chancellor give instructions that this investigation be conducted in public?
(Bearing in mind that the Adjudicator has been asked to refer the entirety of the evidence received by him to HM Judges - for all purposes of arriving at a resolution of the Constitutional Issues now brought into question).
4. Evidence now entered before an NPAS tribunal that serves to confirm that fines in excess of £3 million have been taken from members of the public unlawfully - and that bailiff action has been taken unlawfully in more than 2000 cases -
All of this within a relatively small area of the country!
Can the Lord Chancellor explain why it is that adjudication proceedings undertaken by NPAS adjudicators have failed to uncover these unlawful activities?
and why it is that members of the public have been forced to investigate the unlawful conduct of the offending councils?
Can the Lord Chancellor explain what is being done to ensure that controls on the conduct of local authorities are more rigourously enforced by all processes of adjudication for the future?
Can the Lord Chancellor confirm that offending Councils will be obliged to return to the members of the public all of those fines that have been unlawfully imposed/collected - and that compensation will be paid to those members of the public who have been unlawfully subjected to the activity of bailiffs?
6. Can the Lord Chancellor now confirm that all appeals heard by NPAS adjudicators - from the inception of decriminalised parking in 1991, and to this present date will now be subjected to a complete audit of records, by an official body that is completely independent of NPAS - and responsible only to parliament itself - with a view to establishing all Local Authority & Adjudication Error throughout England & Wales, including London ?
7. Can the Lord Chancellor confirm that NPAS will now be subjected to a most rigourous overhaul of its funding arrangements; objectives; organization and conduct - with a view to ensuring that the public is provided with a truly
independent service that is capable of performing its functions in a manner
that is both efficient and acceptable to the people?
8. Can the Lord Chancellor confirm that all Councils now operating decriminalised
parking regimes will be required to attend; make their case and be subjected
to cross-examination on the evidence that these Councils provide to the tribunals responsible for hearing the appeals made by members of the public - as is normal process in the lower courts of HM System of Courts?
In the case of the tribunal at Worcester, the local authority failed to attend the
hearing after providing the appellant with an assurance that there would be
attendance - and as a result of this failure, it proved impossible for the appellant
to cross-examine the representative of the Council on the evidence provided by
that Council -
The adjudicator at this tribunal freely admitted to the Appellant that he (the adjud-
icator) had not asked to see the TrafficRegulation Orders that were applicable to all
of the previous cases of appeal that he (the adjudicator) had heard in Worcester -
and ss a consequence of this admitted failure in the adjudication service, there
iremains the risk that appellants in Worcester may well have found their appeeals
dismissed - in spite of failures by the Worcester City Council to establish any
lawful reason for the appellant/s to pay the relevant Penalty Charge/s.
Can the Lord Chancellor now confirm that evidence relating to the Traffic Regulation
Order that is applicable in any case of appeal will be inspected for error by the
adjudicator who is made responsible for the hearing of any appeal - and that this
inspection process will be made mandatory for all parts of England & Wales,
including London.l
9. Can the Lord Chancellor confirm that all adjudicators appointed to the panel of independent adjudicators maintained by NPAS will, for the future, be required
to take an Oath of Allegiance to the Crown - with a further Judicial Oath - before
hearing any cases of appeal - with both oaths being taken after a sensible period
of training in the relevant forms of judicial process?
10. Can the Lord Chancellor confirm that the process of Judicial Review will be most carefully described to the general public by NPAS and NPAS adjudicators - both of which are currently advising the public that there is no process of appeal from the decisions made by NPAS tribunals and adjudicators?
The arrangements made for the proper administration of the Queen's Justice may not
be regulated or in any way hidden from the subjects of the Queen by any independent
adjudication service!
I hope that these questions are clear enough for use - and these side-results from 18th November hearing can be very useful ammunition in their own right -
Please do everything possible to turn these side-results into matters of public interest -
because within these questions may lie the seeds that will destroy the corrupt NPAS & PATAS
Organization!s!
God Bless - talk soon, I'm sure!
Robin.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Blog Archive
-
▼
2005
(445)
-
▼
November
(63)
- Rochdale Council given 7 day ultimatum...Give the ...
- Transport Committee and the Freedom of Lack of Inf...
- Daily Express Poll - the result
- The answers from Rochdale Council over their unlaw...
- Can this really be the end for the St George flag?
- The end of parking fines may be in sight
- Transport Committee puts its hands in its ears and...
- More news and press reports in brief
- Eu flag remains down
- We'll keep the Blue Flag Flying
- Press Release: Robin de Crittenden wins Appeal...n...
- Decittenden v Worcester...Decision to be announced
- Herron on TalkSport...Parking Fine Mess
- Opponents pole-axed in flag row
- Eurocrats ban our Red Ensign
- Wear Valley District Council...Unanimous decision ...
- Rights to fight parking ticket
- Press Release:- Wear Valley Council and that EU Flag
- Wear Valley Council desperate to fly the EU flag
- Zoe Hughes Column: Transport Committee...Dunwoody ...
- Road problems? You should have voted for the regio...
- Robin Decrittenden v Worcester City Council...Ques...
- NPAS Adjudicator Andrew Prickett to be given 'assi...
- Evidence Submission by Neil Herron to the Worceste...
- An end to Counties? Political Vandalism by New Labour
- Misfeasance in Public Office...Oh Dear, Sunderland...
- I'll prove parking fines are illegal...Report of t...
- Your details are sold to car park extortionists
- Robin Decrittenden v Worcester City Council...NPAS...
- Thousands of drivers face clamping for old offence...
- Another flag victory for the People's No Campaign
- North West Regional Assembly 'like a private club'
- Worcester Case report
- Press Release: Tribunal Hearing may expose Worcest...
- Notice of Event: Bill of Rights Hearing in Worcester
- Newcastle City Councillor attempts to intimidate c...
- The Guest who won't take 'No' for an answer
- Newcastle City Council in Parking Mess
- Transport Committee Caught 'Bang to Rights'
- Transport Committee 'adjusts' official document......
- Another admission by Sunderland...Now it's the Met...
- £133,000 spent by quango on HQ art
- Parking meters face new reverse
- Desperate attempts to legitimise unlawful EU Flag
- Conservatives speak...a year too late!
- Commons Transport Committee in Bill of Rights 'Cov...
- Zoe Hughes reports double clanger in Journal
- Wheel clamping drive signalled
- Press Release: Another Howler from Sunderland Coun...
- "Is Sunderland a City?" "Dunno. We can't find the ...
- Ever wanted to say 'We told you so?'
- Campaigners still saying 'No'
- No Campaign's Headlights Frighten Assembly Rabbit
- North East Assembly Savaged
- Attention Motorists: Parking Issue exposed on Toni...
- Getting under the skin of the europhiles
- Tonight with Trevor Mc Donald: Parking Fines Frida...
- Transport Committee:Further Submission: "Fine or P...
- North East Assembly's Notice to Quit
- Penalty Charge Fine Mess...now Portsmouth
- Sunderland Council's parking regime in meltdown
- North East Assembly Given Notice to Quit
- Rochdale MP asks Parking questions in the House of...
-
▼
November
(63)
No comments:
Post a Comment