Lambeth Council has been accused of "arrogance" and "incompetence" after a man had to take the local authority to court to claim back money it owed him.
Former Beulah Hill resident Jonathan Greatorex was wrongly handed a fine last year at the controversial Salter's Hill junction in Upper Norwood.
After having an appeal against the fine upheld by The Parking and Traffic Appeals Service (PaTAS), the council was ordered to pay Mr Greatorex his legal fees on March 28.
advertisement
But despite a number of phone calls and letters of reminder, the council failed to pay him within 28 days, and Mr Greatorex was last Thursday forced to issue proceedings via the County Court to enforce the debt, which spiralled to over £200.
This money would increase with interest for every day the council did not pay him back, wasting tax payers' money.
Although Mr Greatorex finally received a cheque on Monday, it did not include the county court costs of £40, which are still owed to him with interest.
Mr Greatorex, who now lives in Wales, said: "The council's arrogance throughout this whole matter has been just beyond belief.Yet again, it continues to waste taxpayers money through either its own incompetence or sheer bloody-mindedness."
"What is totally unbelievable is that in failing to pay the costs when it was told to, the council has ignored the ruling of someone who is essentially a judge. Who do they think they are?"
The 37-year-old's fine was one of a massive 6,286 penalty notices handed out in just 128 days last year to drivers who had supposedly not given way at the junction.
At Mr Greatorex's initial appeal in January, he claimed CCTV images used by the council to show he had broken give way rules had been manipulated.
PaTAS adjudicator Joanne Oxlade ruled the junction as flawed, saying signage there was inadequate and the CCTV's zoom function had distorted the stills produced.
A Lambeth Council spokesman denied the council had deliberately not paid Mr Greatorex.
He said it recognised the appeal ruling and failed to make the payment in time due to an administrative error.
Posted by: Simon Rook, Warwickshire on 2:13pm Wed 14 May 08
I hope all the rate payers of lambeth are happy with this performance by their council, the dodgy activity to try and raise revenue using an ilegaly parked car (Obstruction being a criminal offence still) as well as parkling in such a way that they themselves would normally have rushed to issue tickets to, continuing to harras drivers who were guilty of no offence, continuing this in the face of all the evidence that the council itself was the one creating the offences, and then, even after all that, failing to pay the innocent parties costs and incurring yet more losses from the money that should be being used to serve the rate payers of the borough.
I hope all the rate payers of lambeth are happy with this performance by their council, the dodgy activity to try and raise revenue using an ilegaly parked car (Obstruction being a criminal offence still) as well as parkling in such a way that they themselves would normally have rushed to issue tickets to, continuing to harras drivers who were guilty of no offence, continuing this in the face of all the evidence that the council itself was the one creating the offences, and then, even after all that, failing to pay the innocent parties costs and incurring yet more losses from the money that should be being used to serve the rate payers of the borough.
Posted by: Andy Jones, Herne Hill on 9:40am Thu 15 May 08
Surely the time has now come for there finally to be some resignations at Town Hall over this fiasco?
It really is high-time that Lambeth stopped issuing pathetic, playground excuses (administrative error indeed!) and actually APOLOGISED, yes [bold]APOLOGISED![/bold]
It really isn't that difficult, you just say "we are sorry for getting it wrong".
Then refund the £300,000 that they illegally raised at this location!
Surely the time has now come for there finally to be some resignations at Town Hall over this fiasco?
It really is high-time that Lambeth stopped issuing pathetic, playground excuses (administrative error indeed!) and actually APOLOGISED, yes APOLOGISED!
It really isn't that difficult, you just say "we are sorry for getting it wrong".
Then refund the £300,000 that they illegally raised at this location!
Administrative error, my elbow. Do administrative errors stop them paying housing benefit? Do administrative errors stop them emptying the bins? Do administrative errors stop them providing carers for elderly and vulnerable people, or teachers for their schools? I sincerely hope not!
Surely the person who decided to enforce the fine in the first place could have seen this through? You could hardly forget!
Then again - did Lambeth actually bother sending anyone to defend their decision at the appeal tribunal? I bet they didn't!
It's ridiculous that you have to use the County Courts to enforce a government organisation's debts. I hope Mr Greatorex goes all the way, and gets his costs too.
To be fair to Lambeth, though, the appeal adjudicator is not "essentially a judge". If it [italic]was[/italic] a court of law, and if she [italic]wes[/italic] a judge, then Lambeth would be up for contempt of court. But that's not the case.
But these decisions [italic]can[/italic] be legally enforced. So it doesn't change the fact that Lambeth's ineptitude is still a waste of taxpayer's money.
Administrative error, my elbow. Do administrative errors stop them paying housing benefit? Do administrative errors stop them emptying the bins? Do administrative errors stop them providing carers for elderly and vulnerable people, or teachers for their schools? I sincerely hope not!
Surely the person who decided to enforce the fine in the first place could have seen this through? You could hardly forget!
Then again - did Lambeth actually bother sending anyone to defend their decision at the appeal tribunal? I bet they didn't!
It's ridiculous that you have to use the County Courts to enforce a government organisation's debts. I hope Mr Greatorex goes all the way, and gets his costs too.
To be fair to Lambeth, though, the appeal adjudicator is not "essentially a judge". If it was a court of law, and if she wes a judge, then Lambeth would be up for contempt of court. But that's not the case.
But these decisions can be legally enforced. So it doesn't change the fact that Lambeth's ineptitude is still a waste of taxpayer's money.
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
Print
Email this
Comment
