Need help with contesting Parking fines?(part 2)

THE ROLE OF THE TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT CENTRE

By it's own 'Code of Conduct' issued to all local authorities staff at the TEC should amongst their other duties

*Authorise the preparation of an order for the recovery

*Consider and process statutory declarations

*Process revocation notices cancelling the notice to owner/enforcement notice/penalty charge notice or charge certificate following acceptance of a statutory declaration

*Authorise the preparation of warrants of execution

*Extend the time allowed for filing a statutory declaration upon receipt of a valid request from the respondent (motorist - Our definition).

IS THE TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT CENTRE A COURT?

The TEC would have you believe that it is. It's Code of Conduct goes on to add 'Staff at the TEC will not give any advice on any procedure other than the Court Registration process. Court staff are not legally trained'. That's pretty clear.


The Code then adds 'If after 14 days from service of the Charge Certificate, the charge still remains unpaid, the local authority can apply to the County Court (TEC) to recover the unpaid charge, as if it were payable under a County Court order. That takes 'clear' to 'definitive'.


The TEC sees itself as a court even though it admits that it's staff are NOT legally trained.


However no judges, solicitors or barristers will ever be found near to or within the TEC or preparing papers for litigation or hearings within the TEC. No hearings are overseen by the TEC. The cut and thrust of litigation simply does not exist at the TEC. Statutory declarations can only be made on the limited techical options offered by the TEC which does not consider any facts of the case as these cannot be included on a statutory declaration. A court which does not consider the facts of the case? Curiouser and curiouser.


No judges, solicitors or barristers and no hearings plus staff who is it is admitted are not legally trained to make considerations over statutory declarations they process and which the respondents (motorists) are required to have witnessed by an officer of a county court or a Commissioner for Oaths on pain of being advised that wrongful information may be committing an act of perjury, can only confirm that the TEC is not a court.  And any claim to the contrary becomes even more unsustainable.