Bus Lane Ticket 34j Contravention, Barely on the bus lane |
Bus Lane Ticket 34j Contravention, Barely on the bus lane |
Thu, 29 Oct 2020 - 22:42
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 18 Joined: 9 May 2020 Member No.: 108,652 |
Hi All,
Wondering if you can help here: I got a bus lane ticket just as the bus lane started and I moved across out of the lane with barely a quarter of the car over the line. I'm looking at the grounds for appeal and only the following are available: - recipient was not the owner - vehicle was taken without owner consent - contravention did not occur - police are already taking action Is the bus lane valid? Is there a grace (read on some posts) PCN and Images are attached. Location on Google: Google Maps Here is the videobus lane: It would be great to know if you think it would be worth to contest. Thank you in advance for your help. Regards |
|
|
Advertisement |
Thu, 29 Oct 2020 - 22:42
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Thu, 29 Oct 2020 - 22:44
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
Get and post the video
-------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Fri, 30 Oct 2020 - 00:05
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 20,919 Joined: 22 Apr 2012 Member No.: 54,455 |
Looks totally trivial to me, but an adjudicator may disagree. Essentially, you have the choice of standing your ground and going to London Tribunals on the basis of "the offence did not occur" reason - de minimis, (too small to bother about), or coughing up the discounted amount. I say this because councils are only after your money, so will refuse all representations.
If it were me, I'd stand my ground, but see what the others say, but don't miss any deadlines. This post has been edited by Incandescent: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 - 00:06 |
|
|
Fri, 30 Oct 2020 - 12:04
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
The GSV link shows there's no sign at the start of the bus lane, but this is not visible in the video. You need to go back and get a photo, if the sign is still missing then it's an open and shut case.
You have two additional grounds that are less certain, but could still win: 1) The offence is de-minimis 2) The camera is not going to be an authorised device, see this thread: http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=135114 PMB the video is here: https://vimeo.com/473625913 -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Fri, 30 Oct 2020 - 12:14
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
Both you and the car in front swerved momentarily into the bus lane. Any reason?
-------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Sat, 31 Oct 2020 - 01:32
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 18 Joined: 9 May 2020 Member No.: 108,652 |
Looks totally trivial to me, but an adjudicator may disagree. Essentially, you have the choice of standing your ground and going to London Tribunals on the basis of "the offence did not occur" reason - de minimis, (too small to bother about), or coughing up the discounted amount. I say this because councils are only after your money, so will refuse all representations. If it were me, I'd stand my ground, but see what the others say, but don't miss any deadlines. Exactly, I'm inclined to stand my ground - it's not as if I intentionally drove in the lane to avoid traffic or to use it for a long stretch of the road. Is there a specific de minimis case as a reference? |
|
|
Sat, 31 Oct 2020 - 01:45
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 18 Joined: 9 May 2020 Member No.: 108,652 |
The GSV link shows there's no sign at the start of the bus lane, but this is not visible in the video. You need to go back and get a photo, if the sign is still missing then it's an open and shut case. You have two additional grounds that are less certain, but could still win: 1) The offence is de-minimis 2) The camera is not going to be an authorised device, see this thread: http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=135114 PMB the video is here: https://vimeo.com/473625913 Thanks for the reply. There is no sign at the start of the lane i.e. the dashed line. There is a sign a good few metres back before the zebra crossing before the bus lane And a sign a good few metres after the start. Is there a car reference or perceived guideline for de minimis? In layman's regarding the camera, does this mean the camera cannot be used? |
|
|
Sat, 31 Oct 2020 - 01:57
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 18 Joined: 9 May 2020 Member No.: 108,652 |
|
|
|
Sat, 31 Oct 2020 - 09:24
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17 Joined: 27 Oct 2020 Member No.: 110,320 |
Both you and the car in front swerved momentarily into the bus lane. Any reason? Good spot, I've been trying to recall what happened and think there was something there. Thanks It looks like you both swerved to avoid your left hand side tyres hitting the pothole on the edge of the bus lane near the bottom of the screen |
|
|
Sat, 31 Oct 2020 - 12:20
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
There is no sign at the start of the lane i.e. the dashed line. There is a sign a good few metres back before the zebra crossing I'm not sure the signage is complaint, after all at the zebra crossing you'd be looking for pedestrians. Can you get us a picture from here? https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5484317,0.0...6384!8i8192 -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Sat, 31 Oct 2020 - 12:34
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
Having looked at GSV and the video I don't think swerving to avoid a pot hole would wash
But what does IMO have legs is this https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5484977,0.0...6384!8i8192 There should be a sign here at the start of the bus lane and the advance warning sign is to far back its about 60 metres and should be 30 you are coming from a single lane carriageway to what appears to be 2 lane, start to move over, see the sign that is some 50 metres after the start of the bus lane so pull back out -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Sat, 31 Oct 2020 - 21:59
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 18 Joined: 9 May 2020 Member No.: 108,652 |
Having looked at GSV and the video I don't think swerving to avoid a pot hole would wash But what does IMO have legs is this https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5484977,0.0...6384!8i8192 There should be a sign here at the start of the bus lane and the advance warning sign is to far back its about 60 metres and should be 30 you are coming from a single lane carriageway to what appears to be 2 lane, start to move over, see the sign that is some 50 metres after the start of the bus lane so pull back out "There should be a sign here at the start of the bus lane and the advance warning sign is to far back its about 60 metres and should be 30 " Thank you - this is interesting. GSV is about a year old but area has not changed much. I'll get some measurements and see where we go. Is the 30m from the start of the broken lines or the solid white bus lane? |
|
|
Sat, 31 Oct 2020 - 23:13
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
The advance warning sign placed in the zig zags should be 30 metres from the start of the dotted line this is an advisory sign. The regulatory sign shoyld be at the start of the solid line
-------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Sun, 8 Nov 2020 - 21:48
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 18 Joined: 9 May 2020 Member No.: 108,652 |
The advance warning sign placed in the zig zags should be 30 metres from the start of the dotted line this is an advisory sign. The regulatory sign shoyld be at the start of the solid line Thanks. There was no sign at the start of the solid line. Signs before the ZigZag (33m) and way after (80m). What do you think? The contravention did not occur (I can't see any reason that allows contravention is invalid). This post has been edited by AMUK786: Sun, 8 Nov 2020 - 21:50 |
|
|
Sun, 8 Nov 2020 - 21:58
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
The advance warning sign placed in the zig zags should be 30 metres from the start of the dotted line this is an advisory sign. The regulatory sign shoyld be at the start of the solid line Thanks. There was no sign at the start of the solid line. Signs before the ZigZag (33m) and way after (80m). What do you think? The contravention did not occur (I can't see any reason that allows contravention is invalid). The contravention did not occur because the signage was inadequate draft your challenge then post here and we will tidy it up if needed -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Sun, 8 Nov 2020 - 23:32
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 18 Joined: 9 May 2020 Member No.: 108,652 |
The advance warning sign placed in the zig zags should be 30 metres from the start of the dotted line this is an advisory sign. The regulatory sign shoyld be at the start of the solid line Thanks. There was no sign at the start of the solid line. Signs before the ZigZag (33m) and way after (80m). What do you think? The contravention did not occur (I can't see any reason that allows contravention is invalid). The contravention did not occur because the signage was inadequate draft your challenge then post here and we will tidy it up if needed Thanks - what do you think? TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: The alleged contravention in the PCNXXXXXX did not occur since the regulatory signage was inadequate. A regulatory sign is required to be placed as near as practicable to the start of the bus lane. The start of the bus lane is marked with a diagonal broken line. The solid line starts adjacent to the lamp post below. There are no bus signs at the start of the broken line or the start of the solid sign therefore the alleged contravention did not occur. Here is the bus lane with no regulatory sign: (photos of location) The relevant section in the Traffic Signs Manual Chapter 3 states that 9.3.3. The start of the lane is marked with a broken line 9.3.5 The sign to diagram 959B (S9 4 10, see Figure 9 3) is a regulatory sign and should be placed as near as practicable to the start of the lane (diagrom of 959B, 1048, 1010) I request for this PCN to be cancelled as the alleged contravention did not occur. |
|
|
Mon, 9 Nov 2020 - 09:51
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
The advance warning sign placed in the zig zags should be 30 metres from the start of the dotted line this is an advisory sign. The regulatory sign shoyld be at the start of the solid line Thanks. There was no sign at the start of the solid line. Signs before the ZigZag (33m) and way after (80m). What do you think? The contravention did not occur (I can't see any reason that allows contravention is invalid). The contravention did not occur because the signage was inadequate draft your challenge then post here and we will tidy it up if needed Thanks - what do you think? TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: The alleged contravention in the PCNXXXXXX did not occur since the regulatory signage was inadequate. A regulatory sign is required to be placed as near as practicable to the start of the bus lane. The start of the bus lane is marked with a diagonal broken line. The solid line starts adjacent to the lamp post below. There are no bus signs at the start of the broken line or the start of the solid sign therefore the alleged contravention did not occur. Here is the bus lane with no regulatory sign: (photos of location) The relevant section in the Traffic Signs Manual Chapter 3 states that 9.3.3. The start of the lane is marked with a broken line 9.3.5 The sign to diagram 959B (S9 4 10, see Figure 9 3) is a regulatory sign and should be placed as near as practicable to the start of the lane (diagrom of 959B, 1048, 1010) I request for this PCN to be cancelled as the alleged contravention did not occur. no whilst that is OK in it's self start off with what you did and emphasize that you only skimmed the bus lane and did not drive in it -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Mon, 9 Nov 2020 - 12:23
Post
#18
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 18 Joined: 9 May 2020 Member No.: 108,652 |
The advance warning sign placed in the zig zags should be 30 metres from the start of the dotted line this is an advisory sign. The regulatory sign shoyld be at the start of the solid line Thanks. There was no sign at the start of the solid line. Signs before the ZigZag (33m) and way after (80m). What do you think? The contravention did not occur (I can't see any reason that allows contravention is invalid). The contravention did not occur because the signage was inadequate draft your challenge then post here and we will tidy it up if needed Thanks - what do you think? TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: The alleged contravention in the PCNXXXXXX did not occur since the regulatory signage was inadequate. A regulatory sign is required to be placed as near as practicable to the start of the bus lane. The start of the bus lane is marked with a diagonal broken line. The solid line starts adjacent to the lamp post below. There are no bus signs at the start of the broken line or the start of the solid sign therefore the alleged contravention did not occur. Here is the bus lane with no regulatory sign: (photos of location) The relevant section in the Traffic Signs Manual Chapter 3 states that 9.3.3. The start of the lane is marked with a broken line 9.3.5 The sign to diagram 959B (S9 4 10, see Figure 9 3) is a regulatory sign and should be placed as near as practicable to the start of the lane (diagrom of 959B, 1048, 1010) I request for this PCN to be cancelled as the alleged contravention did not occur. no whilst that is OK in it's self start off with what you did and emphasize that you only skimmed the bus lane and did not drive in it Ah, ok - makes sense - how about this? TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: I would like to appeal this PCN. I was driving on Romford Road towards East Ham and just before where this video clip shows there is a single lane with a zebra crossing. As I approached the Zebra crossing my attention was focussed on any pedestrians crossing. The road then becomes two lanes, I ever slightly skimmed across the lane and did not use the bus lane for any length of time and should be considered de minimas. I certainly did not intend to drive in the bus lane as can be seen how I manouvered. There were no signs at the beginning of the bus lane to indicate the start and timings of the bus lane. There was a sign that was 80m further down the road more towards the Hampton Road junction. The alleged contravention in the PCNXXXXXX did not occur since the regulatory signage was inadequate. A regulatory sign is required to be placed as near as practicable to the start of the bus lane. The start of the bus lane is marked with a diagonal broken line. The solid line starts adjacent to the lamp post below. There are no bus signs at the start of the broken line or the start of the solid sign therefore the alleged contravention did not occur. Here is the bus lane with no regulatory sign: (photos of location) The relevant section in the Traffic Signs Manual Chapter 3 states that 9.3.3. The start of the lane is marked with a broken line 9.3.5 The sign to diagram 959B (S9 4 10, see Figure 9 3) is a regulatory sign and should be placed as near as practicable to the start of the lane (diagrom of 959B, 1048, 1010) I request for this PCN to be cancelled as the alleged contravention did not occur. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 13:37 |