Dissident Congress website

Then post it back to the council with this letter

Dear Sir

The issuing of an Excess Charge Notice is illegal under the Bill of Rights Act 1689. This Act clearly states "That all grants and promises of fines and forfeitures of particular persons before conviction are illegal and void". The definition of "before conviction" means that no fine or forfeit can be imposed until and unless the individual is convicted in a court of law.

The Road Traffic Acts allow the imposition of Excess Charge Notices, and as they came into force after 1689 then they are assumed to take precedence over previous Acts of Parliament including the Bill of Rights Act 1689. However, the Road Traffic Acts are ordinary statutes whereas the Bill of Rights Act 1689 is a Constitutional statute. An ordinary statute may be impliedly repealed. A constitutional statute may not be impliedly repealed or overridden by a ordinary statute passed by Parliament at a later date.

Unless the Road Traffic Acts refer to the Bill of Rights Act 1689 (which they do not), then any section of a Road Traffic Act which contradicts the Bill of Rights Act 1689 must fall by the wayside. The Bill of Rights Act 1689 cannot be impliedly repealed. It is a constitutional Act that protects our "constitutional rights".

XXXX Council is therefore acting unlawfully by demanding payments before conviction.