On 10/04/2024 09:46 am, Spike wrote:
Warning! This is a tediously long article, and it seems unclear what comprises the ‘update’. There is no TL;DR version.
road.cc at its best, eh?
<https://road.cc/content/news/cyclist-fined-ps100-riding-cycle-path-307633>
QUOTE (by road.cc):
Describing her punishment as “ridiculous”, especially due to the
presence of signs indicating the path’s shared-use status 30 yards from
where she was stopped, Gillmeister quickly and successfully appealed the
FPN, with the council agreeing to waive her fine.
ENDQUOTE
When an appeal is successful, the penalty which has previously been
handed down is *quashed*.
A penalty which has been merely "waived" has not been quashed. It has
been substituted because of the decision-making authority taking the
view that the penalty might, in all the circumstances, have been too
harsh. It does NOT mean that no offence has been committed (which is
what a successful appeal means).
Had "Gillmeister" *won* an appeal, the council issuing the
appealed-against penalty would NOT have had any role to play in
"waiving" the "fine" (FPN). The FPN would have been quashed by decision
of the appellate body and there would have been nothing for the local
authority to "waive".
Road.cc: illiteracy and ignorance for the benefit of the ignorant and illiterate.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)