Pledge your support to oppose the Southwark wide CPZ

[MrsR]

Please contribute if you can…
 

https://opposethecpz.org/2023/08/28/funding-for-legal-advice/

[first mate]

3 hours ago, MrsR said:

Please contribute if you can…
 

https://opposethecpz.org/2023/08/28/funding-for-legal-advice/

Thanks for sharing, it would be good if at the very least this could result in a properly conducted and properly worded consultation, where councillors also indicate they will listen and take into account the views of residents, rather than impose.

[Spartacus]

1 hour ago, first mate said:

Thanks for sharing, it would be good if at the very least this could result in a properly conducted and properly worded consultation, where councillors also indicate they will listen and take into account the views of residents, rather than impose.

I think that's all anyone really wants and if it had happened all along, 100s of posts may not have happened. 

But instead it feels like a council steam roller is trundling back and forth on local residents and their views (positive and negative) 

Edited August 28, 2023 by Spartacus

[CPR Dave]

Would love to contribute but these costs seem high and it would be disappointing if, say, £10k was raised for the preliminary stage  and the initial advice was then that the chances of the JR succeeding were hopeless.

It would also be quite annoying if the advice was that there was a good prospect but to proceed further you then need to raise even more money.

Have you shopped around for fee quotes? Can you not get a quote that is all in - i.e. includes the initial advice and the cost of the application and court proceedings?

You could also look at a direct access barrister specialising in local government public law to cut the costs of the initial review.

You need to get as much bang for your buck as possible to better your chances.

Edited August 28, 2023 by CPR Dave

[march46]

If anyone is thinking of donating it’s worth remembering the now defunct Dulwich Alliance’s efforts to seek a judicial review.
 

Donations totalled £28,250 and it would seem all that happened was lawyer’s advised against pursuing legal action.

[first mate]

Yes, but that was LTNs. This is a different issue. There is no mandate for borough wide CPZ and no proper consultation. 

Edited August 29, 2023 by first mate

[first mate]

On 28/08/2023 at 13:03, MrsR said:

Please contribute if you can…
 

https://opposethecpz.org/2023/08/28/funding-for-legal-advice/

LTNs were somewhat different, brought in during the pandemic and initiated by Govt. Borough-wide CPZ is very different and no mandate for it.

[Rockets]

Always keep in mind the judge's summing up from the ULEZ lawfulness challenge and the robustness of the consultation (which will put more pressure on any consultations):

"While the consultation conducted was not in-depth, it was lawful."

 

The ULEZ consultation included a response to respond against the plans - the CPZ consultation doesn't which may not qualify as "in-depth" and I sense this is why Southwark are promising a second consultation for some CPZs. That is most likely in direct response to the judge's comments and the warning shot he fired across their bow.

[first mate]

Are these secondary 'consultations' the one and only forum where Nunhead residents will be able to say "no" to CPZ but where they have already been told that CPZ will be imposed on them anyway, whatever the outcome?

It is beyond cynical and I believe this was out of the mouth of that great champion of the people and socialist/marxist, Cllr McAsh. It is this attack on the democratic process that really gets me.

Talking about McAsh, are we any closer to hearing about missing LTN data?