PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

53J Experimental Traffic Order Islington, Hungerford Road, 4 x Fines worth £260 (or more)
Srav22ros
post Sun, 11 Apr 2021 - 11:51
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 11 Apr 2021
Member No.: 112,230



Hi lovely people,

I've received not one...but 4 PCNs for 53J under Islington's brand new School Streets scheme. I plan to challenge it as follows. I know you've reviewed a few of these so would be good to have any pointers where people have had recent success. As far as I can make out they seemed to have updated their letters /process so it seems watertight on some of the more basic timing and language issues others have successfully challenged on. My angles will be improper advanced public information and signage.

Let me know if you spot anything - planning to appeal ASAP as I've already exceeded 14 days for two of them.

Here are the images of the letters. Couldn't upload them using the forum software. https://drive.google.com/drive/u/2/folders/...kCTitOXigr4mVj5

----------

Sunday 11th April

Dear Islington Council,

My name is xxx, of xxxxx. I was surprised to find four Penalty Charge Notices (two dated 26th March and two dated 31st March) on my return home today 11th April, after more than two weeks away. Please accept the below representations on behalf of the four alleged contraventions, with my apologies that two of them exceed the stated 14 day period, due to circumstances beyond my control.

All regarding the same alleged contravention of “Failing to comply with a restriction on vehicles entering a pedestrian zone" at Hungerford Road [NB] [By Camera IS0065] [Zone D]. The vehicle registration is AO15 AOE and I am the registered keeper and owner. The four alleged incidents took place on the following dates:

17th March:
PCN Number xxxxx at 15.18

22nd March:
PCN Number xxx at 15.18

24th March:
PCN Number xxxx at 09.04
PCN Number xxxxx at 15.20

My reasons for challenging this PCN are explained below:

Inadequate information provided to local residents in advance of experimental traffic orders

The council has a duty to consult inform residents about road changes in the most accessible way. Although ‘experimental’ orders permit Councils to postpone consultation (which itself the subject of an ongoing legal challenge), the need for clear and accessible information ahead of changes still applies. I did not receive a leaflet or see any notification of the changes posted in the local area or local media. I only learned of the existence of experimental traffic orders in Islington by googling the specific code and street name on my PCN. I found this letter published on the council’s website and this FAQ sheet. This information would have been very helpful had I registered parking permit holders in the local area received it through the post in advance of the measures. How are residents expected to have come across a notification of these changes?



Could you please provide me with details of the measures taken to inform local residents in advance of these experimental traffic orders coming into force - specifically this one in Hungerford road?

Unclear or inadequate signage

The letter indicated that the school streets scheme was live from January 2021. But schools only formally opened in March and the scheme is supposed to be closed (with signed not visible) during school holidays. Can you tell me exactly when the measures are and are not in force? And can you confirm what signage or information was erected in the local area to provide advance warning of the restrictions?

The letter also indicates that temporary advance warning signs will be erected ahead of the scheme going live. I traveled down York way frequently in February and did to see any such notices. Can you confirm whether this happened?

As such the only signage that indicates the road closure and the restricted times at the entrance to Hungerford road (which are not clearly visible in photographs provided) cannot possibly be read, processed, and corrective action taken by a driver travelling up to 20mph exiting the busy and fast moving traffic from York way, without impeding that traffic and becoming a hazard to cars and pedestrians.

To be clear, I am not opposed to the intention behind the order but the way it has been carried out with inadequate information and public consultation. The only reason I know about the restrictions at all is from the letter. The PCN itself and the evidence provided offer, offer insufficient clarity and evidence of the contravention because the times on the advance warning sign are not clearly visible.

Insufficient photographic evidence for PCN Number xxxxxx at 15.18 22nd March

The photographs provided for this PCN do not clearly indicate the vehicle AO15AOE. The number plate is not visible in the pictures provided (albeit there is a separate screenshot, which could have been taken from the other PCNs). Please provide evidence that the vehicle in question is the same registration AO15AOE.

--------

This post has been edited by Srav22ros: Mon, 12 Apr 2021 - 06:33
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Sun, 11 Apr 2021 - 11:51
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Fluffykins
post Sun, 11 Apr 2021 - 16:25
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 475
Joined: 26 Feb 2008
Member No.: 17,593



This is in the wrong forum. You need it in the Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices section. Ask the mods to move it. I think there will be a Report link by your first post.

Also: REMOVE THOSE PERSONAL DETAILS - addess, name, reference numbers. Just keep dates in.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Srav22ros
post Mon, 12 Apr 2021 - 06:37
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 11 Apr 2021
Member No.: 112,230



Thanks. That's what it says at the top of my screen but have requested it moved and deleted personal details. Thanks. Should I redact them on the images too?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ryan 93
post Mon, 12 Apr 2021 - 09:16
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 963
Joined: 14 Jul 2020
Member No.: 109,137



Advanced warning or No Left Turn sign on the traffic light would be essential for this restriction. GSV looks outdated, have you visited York Way recently to examine the signage prior to the restriction on Hungerford Road?

It would be interesting to see the traffic management order for this restriction, however I can’t find it anywhere.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Srav22ros
post Mon, 12 Apr 2021 - 15:00
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 11 Apr 2021
Member No.: 112,230



Thanks for the response. I went over there and took the following snaps.

It does look like there is one small advance warning sign, but no change to the traffic lights indicating no left turn. I'm not sure if they're required to make indicate no left turn for a limited time-bound scheme like this.

The signs were all closed (with no locks) because it's school holidays this week - doubly confusing for drivers about when the measures are in force. But I managed to get a couple of images of what they look like when open.


Attached File(s)
Attached File  pcnsignage.zip ( 905.07K ) Number of downloads: 174
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Mon, 12 Apr 2021 - 15:19
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,268
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/3689293

You first state local residents were not informed, then refer to a letter you received about the scheme?
Am I misunderstanding?


--------------------
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 11 May 2018 - 12:30) *
Neil is good at working backwards.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Srav22ros
post Mon, 12 Apr 2021 - 17:06
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 11 Apr 2021
Member No.: 112,230



Thanks for your response Neil B.

No you misunderstand. I only found the letter online after googling the code and street name of the PCN I was issued - 53J and Hungerford road.

My argument has three points:

1. My first contention is that the actual public information campaign was insufficient (I'm sure this alone isn't reason enough to cancel the fine but worth adding as mitigating reasons for contravention of new orders to a familiar commute)

Thanks for sharing the gazette article - they explicitly reference coronavirus as a limiting factor in making advance information publically available. I'm not sure if that means they would usually do more, such as leaflets through door and if that supports my argument.

2. My second is that the signage itself is unclear, small text - unreadable in the images provided and unreasonable for a driver to take avoiding action in time

3. Lastly the in images on one of the PCNs the number plate isn't legible

@Neil B or others - I'd be really grateful if you

a) have any amendments or additions to my letter as it stands

b) give an assessment of the chances of these representations based on your experience

I'm going to send it later tonight as its already passed the 14 reduced period. I'm hoping they will at least extend that period.


PS - I can come off unintentionally self-righteous in formal complaints so feedback on tone also welcome!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Mon, 12 Apr 2021 - 17:23
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,268
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



Councils normally leaflet road directly affected and sometimes a few more but not as far away as you.
For others you just supposed to obey the signs.

Maybe you should show clearer pics and the videos to get opinions here.

If you are looking to reinstate the discount for two then you should send some proof of your absence.

--
Your bit about the VRM not being visible is nonsense. How else would the PCN reach you?


--------------------
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 11 May 2018 - 12:30) *
Neil is good at working backwards.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ryan 93
post Mon, 12 Apr 2021 - 17:56
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 963
Joined: 14 Jul 2020
Member No.: 109,137



Don’t rush your challenge, at least wait until some feedback from other members. The whole council consultation thing will just detract from your main argument and agree with Neil on VRM thing.

I would challenge the PCNs on the grounds that the contravention did not occur as the Local Authority failed to provide the driver adequate warning of the restriction.

I was driving on York Way and upon reaching the traffic lights I turned left onto Hungerford Road, however as can be seen in my evidence attached theres inadequate warning signage on York Way for drivers turning left where the restriction begins. Furthermore the traffic lights at the junction of York Way/Hungerford Road are devoid of a No Left Turn symbol which would be crucial to notify drivers about the restriction in the absence of warning signage.

Advanced warning should be provided to motorists for restrictions beginning at road junctions or side roads as outlined under point 5.1.3. in Chapter 3 of The Traffic Signs Manual:
“Advance warning of certain restrictions may be given by incorporating the prohibitory sign into direction signs or advance direction signs as shown in Figure 5‐1 (see also Chapter 7). These are not a substitute for the terminal signs that indicate the start of the restriction. Unless the restriction begins at the junction, either on the main road or on the side road, a distance plate should be included so that drivers can judge whether they can reach a particular property or destination before reaching the restriction. Exception plates may be included on these signs in accordance with S12‐20‐45. The restrictions that may be signed in this way are shown in S12‐20 and are:
a) Item 22; No vehicles (diagram 617, S3‐2‐11, see Figure 5‐5)
b) Item 23; No motor vehicles (diagram 619, S3‐2‐12, see Figure 5‐8)”.

When turning left into the restriction on Hungerford Road, the pedestrian zone signage is facing away from the drivers peripheral vision, therefore its only encountered once the driver is on top of the restriction, and at this point the driver has zero time to process the restriction or make the correct adjustments; the matters are also exacerbated by the specific prescribed timings on the restriction and the signage placement which lies outside the drivers view at 12 o clock in the sky. The council cannot reasonably expect drivers turning left to process the restriction under these circumstances nor can the penalty be served on these terms when the Local Authority has failed to give the driver adequate warning.

On these grounds I request all 4 x PCNs be cancelled without undue delay, I also request the council install appropriate warning signage for drivers turning left at this location.

Good Day.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Srav22ros
post Mon, 12 Apr 2021 - 19:24
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 11 Apr 2021
Member No.: 112,230



Points taken on board about dropping my first and third reasons - I'll remove them and focus on the signage.

Thanks a bunch for the revised text about the signage Ryan 93. Reads well. I do think the signs are angled towards the camera rather than drivers and a lot smaller and less visible than the permanent controlled zone 20 limit sign.

- Would you quote the whole manual at them? Do you / others think there's a winnable argument there based on the photos?

@Neil B. I've uploaded slightly larger files to the same drive here https://drive.google.com/drive/u/2/folders/...kCTitOXigr4mVj5

- The signs in the photos are closed because it's school holidays - can I still use these in the challenge?

- Videos? Do you mean take one whilst driving the same route or request the video footage from the council?

- Proof of absence could be tricky for a short domestic break - what kind of thing usually works? I've got a receipt for the M6 Toll?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Mon, 12 Apr 2021 - 20:03
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,268
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



Videos and evidence pics are on the council website!


--------------------
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 11 May 2018 - 12:30) *
Neil is good at working backwards.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ryan 93
post Mon, 12 Apr 2021 - 20:10
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 963
Joined: 14 Jul 2020
Member No.: 109,137



If you really want to trim the traffic signs manual quote, then just end the reference before“exception plates etc”.
Tbh it’s not legislation, but it’s good practice regardless.

To answer your question, the restriction stands regardless of it’s present state, essentially if the sign was active during the contraventions then it doesn’t matter whether the sign is closed now.

The council should allow you to access the PCN video online, some users upload to YouTube.

I have no idea about reinstating discount, they would want compelling reason surely? Maybe others can advise.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Mon, 12 Apr 2021 - 20:21
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



Here's one of the videos. I can't see you have any chance on signage.

Best bet is to pay first and ask for discretion on the others as you weren't aware.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ryan 93
post Mon, 12 Apr 2021 - 20:29
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 963
Joined: 14 Jul 2020
Member No.: 109,137



QUOTE (stamfordman @ Mon, 12 Apr 2021 - 21:21) *
Here's one of the videos. I can't see you have any chance on signage.

Best bet is to pay first and ask for discretion on the others as you weren't aware.



How can the driver process the specific timings on that restriction whilst turning and without prior notice, let’s compound the issue with excessive signage including a giant 20mph/controlled zone overshadowing it. Just complete joke with signage placement in the London boroughs at present. Surely if you pay one PCN that’s an admission of fault, I would not want to admit fault when the local authority have failed to greater extent than the driver in this instance.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Mon, 12 Apr 2021 - 20:48
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,268
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



So are you telling the OP he has a good chance to beat all of these?

Suggesting someone pay one at least is not a negative in the circumstances. The idea is to save people money.



--------------------
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 11 May 2018 - 12:30) *
Neil is good at working backwards.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Mon, 12 Apr 2021 - 20:56
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



Let's say at 20mph, which is the speed limit, you failed to take in the full detail on a first occasion. What do you do - do you look it up before going there again or do you just ignore it and hope for the best on multiple trips?

Point being no adjudicator is going to believe the signs were not apparent.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ryan 93
post Mon, 12 Apr 2021 - 21:12
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 963
Joined: 14 Jul 2020
Member No.: 109,137



Could the OP argue on the basis of a continuing contravention, if the driver could process the signs initially then the other contraventions would not have occurred. Once the driver was aware of the contravention via the PCN delivery they became aware of the restriction, the fact the contravention occurred four times shows it’s not possible to process the restriction when turning left with the current signage in place.

With that said I could imagine Chan the merciless probably denying such appeal.

Guess paying one PCN at discount would potentially persuade the council to exercise discretion to cancel the others; possibly better approach than mine.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Mon, 12 Apr 2021 - 21:53
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 26,655
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



Where is the yellow road closed ahead sign. that could be a big help


--------------------
All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
roythebus
post Mon, 12 Apr 2021 - 23:44
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,963
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
From: Near Calais
Member No.: 9,683



I'd not pay any of them, challenge them all on the over-provision of signage. No careful driver could possible be expected to take in that amount of information from at least 7 signs in 4 locations, also seeing the sign to Holloway, then having to try to read and act on information on all the other clutter at 20 mph. It is just not possible.

I'd not pay any of them, challenge them all on the over-provision of signage. No careful driver could possible be expected to take in that amount of information from at least 7 signs in 4 locations, also seeing the sign to Holloway, then having to try to read and act on information on all the other clutter at 20 mph. It is just not possible.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Tue, 13 Apr 2021 - 02:13
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,268
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



Interesting mix of opinions for the OP to judge from.

Too new for any adjudication results yet.


--------------------
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 11 May 2018 - 12:30) *
Neil is good at working backwards.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 08:26
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here