Thanks for your prompt reply. If we may ask what is your expertise in this field?
1. It is not that we are denying receving the enforcmenet notice, we had never received. When we attended the Magistrate for the first time on 11th June 2014 we had asked the magistrate to adjourn the matter as at that stage the only thing we had received was the summons. The magistrate initilay refused but after much persuation we had requested the court to look into the notice and how it was served. It transpired that the Prosecution had sent the enforcement Notice by recorded delivery post. It is at this stage i had asked the the court to check with the royal Mails tracking facility on line to check if the Notice was delivered or not. The magistracy initially refused BUT the clerk intervened and said " the defedant MUST be given the benefit of the doubt". The Court then adjourned while the Clerk checked the recorded delivery slip on line. It had transpired that the Original Enforcement was returned to the send undelivered. The court then agreed to adjourn.
2. (A) The Enforcement officers had never visited the property before serving the Notice. In other words they had no evidence that the property were indeed 3 flats at the time when the enforcement notice was served. The enforcement notice assumed that there were 3 flats and just served an enforcement notice.
2 (b) - The photographs submitted in the trial bundle - except the front door photos do not match with any parts of the property. On other words they werent from the*****
3. Absolutely - there were no evidence before when they say the breach had taken place and now the photos submitted purported to be during an compliance visit do not match to be of the property. If you look closely in evidence submitted - they still do not have evidence that this property to be of 3 flats. They just submitted some photographs of doors claiming to be inside there are flats and yet there is no photos of the flats except photos of the same kitchen twice and there no photos of the 3rd kitchen.
We look forward to hearing from you soon.
Is to a large extent yes except of course those photographs of the front of the property
FAO: Alex Hughes
I'm unable to click on the chain link as it is not active on the tool bar. Is there any other way I could perhaps email the documents over to you. I have the whole thing scanned in my system.
Look forward to hearing from you soon.
I cant seem to load the PDF. Is there any alternative email address where I could send the docs requested.
Hope to hear from you soon.
The email at : *****@******.*** comes back undelivered with the following message. Do you have alternative email or kindly check the email address again.
This is an SMTP server at asp.reflexion.netYour message could not be delivered to the following address: <*****@******.***>
I have just sent the Documents as requested.
Will look forward to your reply soon.
It come returned and not delivered again : *****@******.*** the following message :
Your message could not be delivered to the following address: *****@******.***
There's seems to be a problem with your system. Is there an alternative email address that I could send these docs to please.
Thanks. But the "chain" sign on this website doesn't work, perhaps they should look into this and sort it out so that I could simply upload it on your system.
Your answers were very patchy, something I wasn't expecting from an expert like you. I needed directional answers as to what grounds if any I have.
We are seeking your assistance with an invalid enforcement notice that was served on us but never received by us. Please see below for details.We received a hand delivered summon on the 10th June 2014 to attend a Magistrate court on the 11th June 2014.We attended the court to find out we were being prosecuted for a breach of planning that never took place at one of our property namely 43.The prosecution were then ordered to give us a bundle and court was adjourned.We contacted the legal team at Newnham but the promised prosecution bundle never materialised and we attended 6th August 2014 and informed the magistrates of the situations. The court was adjourned once again and court gave us a copy of the bundle which now attached.The court is now adjourned until 3rd September 2014 during which we will be expected to enter a plea.The issues that we have are :1) We were never served with the original enforcement notice.2) We had never received any Enforcement Notice as we had moved out of the address 261A High Road in the year 2009 and Newham Council's Legal team is well aware of that as they had prosecuted us on on other property in the past. Their record clearly shows that we no longer live at the address that they served the papers on.2) If one was to look deep into the papers you will note that the Enforcement Notice itself ( Page 11 of the attached bundle ) and subsequently in the witness statement of Planning Officer : Stephen Bruce Lytton Pavett , Page 7 of the attached bundle served on assumption, in other words before serving the original enforcement notice the Planning officers had never visited the property and there is no evidence of that.3) There is no evidence at all that this property was ever converted into 3 flats. These are all based on assumptions.Question: Can planning officers allowed to serve enforcement notice based on assumption and in which case is the enforcement notice itself valid? if it is not valid how do we go about challenging that?4) The photographs submitted in the prosecution bundle are not of the subject property except the photos of the front door. We do not recognise any of the other photographs. They do not belong to this property.Questions: How do we go about challenging that?Can you assist us with this and how. What will be your cost of the same.We have only kept the matter brief just to give you a snapshot of the issues that we are facing but the details can be provided on requests.We look forward to hearing from you very soon.Best regardsKamal
The initial enforcement notice was served by post or at least that's what they claimed. When challenged at the Magistrate hearing during the first hearing back in 11th June 2014. The clerk had checked the recorded delivery slip and it was confirmed that the notice was returned back to them "undelivered".
The summons sent tot the address of 261A High Road also been returned to them "undelivered" by the royal Mail. The only summon we had received was the hand delivered one on the 10th June 2014 ( the very first summons) - posted through the letter box of the subject property -*****not at the alleged our address.
Breach of Planning and failure to comply an enforcement Notice contrary to section 179 (2) of the town and Country Planning Act 1990.
But the undelivered aspect was only said verbally by the clerk during the followings:
When we attended the Magistrate for the first time on 11th June 2014 we had asked the magistrate to adjourn the matter as at that stage the only thing we had received was the summons. The magistrate initilay refused but after much persuation we had requested the court to look into the notice and how it was served. It transpired that the Prosecution had sent the enforcement Notice by recorded delivery post. It is at this stage i had asked the the court to check with the royal Mails tracking facility on line to check if the Notice was delivered or not. The magistracy initially refused BUT the clerk intervened and said " the defedant MUST be given the benefit of the doubt". The Court then adjourned while the Clerk checked the recorded delivery slip on line. It had transpired that the Original Enforcement was returned to the send undelivered. The court then agreed to adjourn.
But the problem is we do not have any proof or the copy of the recorded delivery slip ourselves in order for us to prove our claim. It was only said to us by the clerk based on which the magistrate agreed to adjourn the trial.