Bus lane PCN - poor visibility, snowstorm, Did not see bus lane signs - both angled away from road |
Bus lane PCN - poor visibility, snowstorm, Did not see bus lane signs - both angled away from road |
Thu, 10 May 2018 - 21:54
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17 Joined: 31 Oct 2017 Member No.: 94,851 |
Would love help. First time user but have read all round subject and your forums. My son was driving his brother's car home from work in the dark during a snowstorm. Poor visibility. Did not know the road. Had no idea he had driven in a bus lane. Unable to work out location from PCN. Brother wrote requesting video tape evidence (and cancellation of PCN). Rejected cancellation but able to view video which shows poor visibility and the bus lane sign angled towards the pavement.
My husband and I took photos of the signage on 10 April. Bus lane sign is clearly angled towards the pavement. Advance warning sign is even more angled towards the pavement i.e. towards passing pedestrians and away from the road. This is a very short bus lane - approx 2 buses in length. When his car first pulls up at the start of the bus lane, a bus is covering the writing on the road and, having not seen the advance warning sign because it is angled incorrectly, coupled with treacherous road conditions and poor visibility, he had no idea he was about to enter a bus lane. Hope I have managed to use Tinypic correctly so that you can see the PCN and correspondence. Unable to copy the video footage. Would really appreciate any advice. Many thanks. |
|
|
Advertisement |
Thu, 10 May 2018 - 21:54
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Thu, 10 May 2018 - 22:04
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
PM me the details and I'll see if I can post the video.
|
|
|
Fri, 11 May 2018 - 10:02
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17 Joined: 31 Oct 2017 Member No.: 94,851 |
Thank you. I have PM'd you the details
|
|
|
Fri, 11 May 2018 - 10:16
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,007 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Fri, 11 May 2018 - 10:18
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
Odd layout - traffic apart from buses is forced right but there doesn't appear to be a bus gate straightahead.
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.3783592,-0....3312!8i6656 It's certainly snowing. Video: This post has been edited by stamfordman: Fri, 11 May 2018 - 10:39 |
|
|
Fri, 11 May 2018 - 10:18
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,007 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
I think given the angle of approach you have an arguable case on the signage.
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Fri, 11 May 2018 - 12:19
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17 Joined: 31 Oct 2017 Member No.: 94,851 |
Thanks for downloading the video, google map and for your comments cp8759 and stamfordman.
Although I have photos from 10 April of both bus lane sign and advance warning sign being angled away from the road and towards the pavement, could the Council say they are not valid as the alleged contravention took place prior to that date? Is the onus on me to prove the signs were angled on the day in question or would they have to prove they are not? I believe the bus lane sign looks angled in their video? And our later photo evidence shows the same? Could/should I ask for video footage of the road where the advance warning sign is placed so that I can see what it looked like on the day in question? |
|
|
Fri, 11 May 2018 - 13:36
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25,726 Joined: 28 Jun 2010 From: Area 51 Member No.: 38,559 |
Don't worry about whether signs were twisted on the day.
Theie evidence certainly suggests one is. And obscured by a bus. Against that are what seems like clear lane markings. But is certainly worth a shot on poorly maintained hence inadequate signs plus poor weather/visibility and minimal intrusion with no gain from it. That actually looks like the most ridiculous bus lane out there... what is it, 20-30 yards long ?? This post has been edited by DancingDad: Fri, 11 May 2018 - 13:36 |
|
|
Fri, 11 May 2018 - 13:36
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,656 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
The council will undoubtedly state that the signage is and was adequate, You are going to argue that it wasn't.
In your favour. the video clearly shows that when you pulled up behind the bus the lines were hidden. and the sign is angled towards the kerb. There is a lot of signage to take in CPZ no left turn a textual information sign, all that you can see, then comes the traffic lights as the bus moves off. The line is hidden under the bus its entire short length -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Fri, 11 May 2018 - 15:51
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17 Joined: 31 Oct 2017 Member No.: 94,851 |
Much appreciated Dancing Dad and Pastmybest. I will use all this advice to appeal to the Council and hope for the best. Will post response in due course. Many thanks to you all. Jane Eyre
|
|
|
Fri, 11 May 2018 - 16:03
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
Post a draft here first. You have nothing to lose as you've lost the discount but they may reoffer it if they reject the appeal. Then you also get a third bite at adjudication which is a no brainer should they not reoffer.
|
|
|
Fri, 11 May 2018 - 21:08
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17 Joined: 31 Oct 2017 Member No.: 94,851 |
Draft letter for your comments – thanks ☺
I wish to appeal against the charge on the basis that there was no breach of an order or regulations. The signage was poorly maintained and hence inadequate with both the bus lane sign and the advance sign being angled away from the road and therefore not visible to the driver (see attached photos). The video footage clearly shows that when the car pulls up behind the bus, the unbroken bus lane line is hidden, the ‘bus lane’ wording on the road is obscured by the bus, the bus lane sign is angled away from the road and the driver plus the angled sign is further obscured by the bus. In addition to having no advance warning of a bus lane ahead, there is a lot of signage to take in including a CPZ, no left turn and textual information signs and then the traffic lights as the bus moves off. Furthermore the line is hidden under the bus its entire short length. There is minimal intrusion by the car with no gain from it. The video records the snowstorm that evening. The camera operator struggles to get a clear view of the car registration. The middle part of the footage (eg 18:51:43) where the camera angle with the road is at is shallowest gives the closest image of the driver’s viewpoint where he is struggling to see in treacherous conditions. My photo of the angled advance warning sign shows a high sided, wide topped ‘Greggs’ delivery van parked on the road ahead, facing oncoming traffic, and just forward of the bus lane sign. It seems that delivery vans of this nature are at the right height to ‘knock’ the road signs out of alignment and away from the view of approaching drivers. Whilst this must be annoying for the Council, the duty of care for maintaining the signage falls to them and drivers should not be penalised for being unable to see what then becomes inadequate signage. In light of the above I believe there could be no breach of an order or regulations. |
|
|
Sat, 12 May 2018 - 17:11
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
My comments are first to change the opening to 'I am making formal representations against the PCN as follows.'
Then emphasise that they rejected your informal rep with no reference to your points. 'I am disappointed that you made no reference to my points in my informal challenge to this PCN'. Then I would promote the snowstorm - 'First, I re-emphasise that the weather conditions at the time made it harder to see road makings and signs, as your video confirms.' The video records the snowstorm that evening. The camera operator struggles to get a clear view of the car registration. The middle part of the footage (eg 18:51:43) where the camera angle with the road is at is shallowest gives the closest image of the driver’s viewpoint where he is struggling to see in treacherous conditions. 'And apart from the snowstorm,.... put in the rest Others will chip in I'm sure. As I said, if they reject and do not reoffer the discount, this will be going to the adjudicator. |
|
|
Sat, 12 May 2018 - 17:42
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17 Joined: 31 Oct 2017 Member No.: 94,851 |
Thanks Stamfordman
2nd draft below which I will send unless I hear from anyone else. I appreciate the comments regarding possible reoffer and potential adjudication. Dear Sirs I am making formal representations against the PCN as follows. I am disappointed that you made no reference to my points in my informal challenge to this PCN. First I re-emphasise that the weather conditions at the time made it harder to see road markings and signs, as your video confirms. The video records the snowstorm that evening. The camera operator struggles to get a clear view of the car registration. The middle part of the footage (eg 18:51:43) where the camera angle with the road is at is shallowest gives the closest image of the driver’s viewpoint where he is struggling to see in treacherous conditions. Apart from the snowstorm, the signage was poorly maintained and hence inadequate with both the bus lane sign and the advance sign being angled away from the road and therefore not visible to the driver (see attached photos). The video footage clearly shows that when the car pulls up behind the bus, the unbroken bus lane line is hidden, the ‘bus lane’ wording on the road is obscured by the bus, the bus lane sign is angled away from the road and the driver plus the angled sign is further obscured by the bus. In addition to having no advance warning of a bus lane ahead, there is a lot of signage to take in including a CPZ, no left turn and textual information signs and then the traffic lights as the bus moves off. Furthermore the line is hidden under the bus its entire short length. There is minimal intrusion by the car with no gain from it. My photo of the angled advance warning sign shows a high sided, wide topped ‘Greggs’ delivery van parked on the road ahead, facing oncoming traffic, and just forward of the bus lane sign. It seems that delivery vans of this nature are at the right height to ‘knock’ the road signs out of alignment and away from the view of approaching drivers. Whilst this must be annoying for the Council, the duty of care for maintaining the signage falls to them and drivers should not be penalised for being unable to see what then becomes inadequate signage. In light of the above I believe there could be no breach of an order or regulations. Yours faithfully |
|
|
Sat, 12 May 2018 - 17:49
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
In light of the above I believe there could be no breach of an order or regulations.
Change to In the light of the above I believe you should cancel the PCN. |
|
|
Sat, 12 May 2018 - 17:51
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17 Joined: 31 Oct 2017 Member No.: 94,851 |
Will do Stamfordman. Thank you :-)
|
|
|
Sun, 13 May 2018 - 00:59
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 110 Joined: 5 Feb 2018 Member No.: 96,338 |
Odd layout - traffic apart from buses is forced right but there doesn't appear to be a bus gate straightahead. https://www.google.com/maps/@51.3783592,-0....3312!8i6656 It's certainly snowing. Video: The road ahead is not a bus only lane. All traffic can use it but only when turning left from the junction |
|
|
Sat, 19 May 2018 - 18:35
Post
#18
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17 Joined: 31 Oct 2017 Member No.: 94,851 |
PCN cancelled. Huge thank you everyone. Received letter today stating "I can confirm that due to the circumstances explained in your letter, the Penalty Charge Notice has now been cancelled". Such a relief. Very grateful.
|
|
|
Sat, 19 May 2018 - 20:58
Post
#19
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
Great news. And thanks for the nice PM - much appreciated. Hope we don't see you here again!
|
|
|
Sat, 19 May 2018 - 21:36
Post
#20
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25,726 Joined: 28 Jun 2010 From: Area 51 Member No.: 38,559 |
I'm impressed.
Well done lass. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Wednesday, 17th April 2024 - 09:14 |