Advice for Whipps Cross Rd, E11 Bus lane fine |
Advice for Whipps Cross Rd, E11 Bus lane fine |
Mon, 11 Oct 2021 - 22:58
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26 Joined: 11 Oct 2021 Member No.: 114,346 |
Dear forum members
Pls advise on this bus lane camera fine at Whipps Cross Road (London, E11). It seems this is a notorious bus lane camera.. https://www.guardian-series.co.uk/news/1952...ondon-bus-lane/ From a recent page on the same bus lane the de-minimis argument was rejected both by Waltham Forest and at the Tribunal: http://forums.pepipoo.com/lofiversion/index.php/t131889.html Can I appeal on the grounds of no signage indicating operating times or end of the bus lane? Probably not a defense, but it was a long day having been on the road since 6am (traveled to B'ham), and I was unfamiliar with the bus lane as took a detour to my usual way home due to an accident on the A406. I need to appeal by 14 Oct so hope to hear from you soon. Many thanks. This post has been edited by fstar: Mon, 11 Oct 2021 - 23:02 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Mon, 11 Oct 2021 - 22:58
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Tue, 12 Oct 2021 - 06:32
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 2,021 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 Member No.: 59,932 |
Different adjudicators have different yardsticks. A trivial defence succeeded at the tribunal yesterday. We need to see the video please. Put on YouTube or Vimeo etc
-------------------- All advice given by me on PePiPoo is on a pro bono basis (i.e. free). PePiPoo relies on Donations so do donate if you can. Sometimes I will, in addition, personally offer to represent you at London Tribunals (i.e. within greater London only) & if you wish me to I will ask you to make a voluntary donation, if the Appeal is won, directly to the North London Hospice.
|
|
|
Tue, 12 Oct 2021 - 08:47
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 20,919 Joined: 22 Apr 2012 Member No.: 54,455 |
No times on a bus lane sign means it applies 24x7, so no defence there, sorry. Your best bet is probably de minimis, but the council never give way, so you're forced to London Tribunals with the full £130 in play. As noted above, adjudicators all seem to differ on what de minimis means. We need to see the video to give final advice.
|
|
|
Tue, 12 Oct 2021 - 14:14
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
The council might struggle to show that its cameras are prescribed, see See Karine Reinton v London Borough of Bromley (2210250967, 06 July 2021) https://bit.ly/3dQvhSQ
Even if they overcome that problem, they won't have Home Office Type Approval, the only bus lane cameras with HOTA seem to be: JAI BUS-ter 2001: https://bit.ly/3uTRaaZ Peek Guardian Freelane: https://bit.ly/3v4XUmR Peek Guardian Freelane Mark 2: https://bit.ly/2Yu0uXE Virtually all cameras in London nowadays are Zenco Systems and with no Home Office Type Approval, their evidence is inadmissible. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Thu, 14 Oct 2021 - 07:16
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26 Joined: 11 Oct 2021 Member No.: 114,346 |
No times on a bus lane sign means it applies 24x7, so no defence there, sorry. Your best bet is probably de minimis, but the council never give way, so you're forced to London Tribunals with the full £130 in play. As noted above, adjudicators all seem to differ on what de minimis means. We need to see the video to give final advice. Sorry there appears to be an issue with their CCTV view link, I'll try again later today: https://walthamocm.itsvc.co.uk/PCN The other thing is the vehicle I was driving was a hire car, from a company I use fairly regularly so ideally I don't want to drag this to a Tribunal unless real chance of winning as don't want to damage my relationship with the hire car company either. |
|
|
Thu, 14 Oct 2021 - 11:14
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 20,919 Joined: 22 Apr 2012 Member No.: 54,455 |
No times on a bus lane sign means it applies 24x7, so no defence there, sorry. Your best bet is probably de minimis, but the council never give way, so you're forced to London Tribunals with the full £130 in play. As noted above, adjudicators all seem to differ on what de minimis means. We need to see the video to give final advice. Sorry there appears to be an issue with their CCTV view link, I'll try again later today: https://walthamocm.itsvc.co.uk/PCN The other thing is the vehicle I was driving was a hire car, from a company I use fairly regularly so ideally I don't want to drag this to a Tribunal unless real chance of winning as don't want to damage my relationship with the hire car company either. OP, please read carefully what CP8759 has written in #4 regarding camera approvals. The downside is you have to go to London Tribunals to get a result, but as the camera approvals etc are a legal requirement, you must win because no councils in London are using approved cameras. No doubt CP8759 can quote chapter and verse if you're unsure. This post has been edited by Incandescent: Thu, 14 Oct 2021 - 11:15 |
|
|
Thu, 14 Oct 2021 - 13:49
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 29,269 Joined: 16 Jan 2008 Member No.: 16,671 |
The other thing is the vehicle I was driving was a hire car, from a company I use fairly regularly so ideally I don't want to drag this to a Tribunal unless real chance of winning as don't want to damage my relationship with the hire car company either. Who is this PCN addressed to? -------------------- |
|
|
Thu, 14 Oct 2021 - 14:31
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26 Joined: 11 Oct 2021 Member No.: 114,346 |
The hire car company, but I've signed a standard agreement that I'll be responsible for PCN's etc during the hire.
|
|
|
Thu, 14 Oct 2021 - 14:44
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26 Joined: 11 Oct 2021 Member No.: 114,346 |
Here is the video link:
https://linksharing.samsungcloud.com/nl1Dli392frs Please advise ASAP as today is day 14 so if not worth appealing will pay the £65 (discounted amount). This post has been edited by fstar: Thu, 14 Oct 2021 - 14:46 |
|
|
Thu, 14 Oct 2021 - 14:55
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 20,919 Joined: 22 Apr 2012 Member No.: 54,455 |
Here is the video link: https://linksharing.samsungcloud.com/nl1Dli392frs Please advise ASAP as today is day 14 so if not worth appealing will pay the £65 (discounted amount). Yea, fine, you're bang-to-rights on the contravention, but can I re-iterate again, that no London council bus lane cameras are approved for use under the 1996 Act controlling bus lane enforcement in London. (see #4) However, with your hire contract we need to know more detail on whether they just pay all PCNs and then charge you. For instance what would happen if you didn't pay that PCN ? At the moment you have no legal standing in relation to submitting an appeal, it has to come from the hire company. The correct procedure is for the hire/lease company to submit their own representations and give your name and address. A new PCN should then be sent to you. Others will comment. |
|
|
Thu, 14 Oct 2021 - 15:19
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26 Joined: 11 Oct 2021 Member No.: 114,346 |
Here is the video link: https://linksharing.samsungcloud.com/nl1Dli392frs Please advise ASAP as today is day 14 so if not worth appealing will pay the £65 (discounted amount). Yea, fine, you're bang-to-rights on the contravention, but can I re-iterate again, that no London council bus lane cameras are approved for use under the 1996 Act controlling bus lane enforcement in London. (see #4) However, with your hire contract we need to know more detail on whether they just pay all PCNs and then charge you. For instance what would happen if you didn't pay that PCN ? At the moment you have no legal standing in relation to submitting an appeal, it has to come from the hire company. The correct procedure is for the hire/lease company to submit their own representations and give your name and address. A new PCN should then be sent to you. Others will comment. Yes think the procedure should be for hire company to initially liaise and get it sent/addressed to me, but they haven't. I just spoke to them and they said they normally expect hirers to deal with appeals but to contact them if any issues. Regarding invalid bus lane cameras (post #4), has this gone to a Tribunal and been successful? |
|
|
Thu, 14 Oct 2021 - 15:36
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 29,269 Joined: 16 Jan 2008 Member No.: 16,671 |
edit.
The correct procedure is for the hire/lease company to submit their own representations and give your name and address. A new PCN should then be sent to you. Others will comment. They can't for a London bus lane. Regarding invalid bus lane cameras (post #4), has this gone to a Tribunal and been successful? Well he gave a relevant case ref? On other matters, a case for the location won on Tuesday. I can't judge from a night vid how close you are to the end of the bus lane but others might recall from previous cases. This post has been edited by Neil B: Thu, 14 Oct 2021 - 15:28 -------------------- |
|
|
Thu, 14 Oct 2021 - 16:03
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
7.7 metres
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5733633,0...6384!8i8192 at the metal join in the carriageway -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Thu, 14 Oct 2021 - 16:09
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26 Joined: 11 Oct 2021 Member No.: 114,346 |
7.7 metres https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5733633,0...6384!8i8192 at the metal join in the carriageway Thank-you. I assume that rules out de-minimus then? |
|
|
Thu, 14 Oct 2021 - 16:12
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 29,269 Joined: 16 Jan 2008 Member No.: 16,671 |
7.7 metres https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5733633,0...6384!8i8192 at the metal join in the carriageway I just found a useful landmark. The camera perspective is misleading but I do like that storm drain cover in the vid. Right near the end of the lane -- which isn't actually signed, adjudicators have noted. https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5734382,0.0...6384!8i8192 -------------------- |
|
|
Thu, 14 Oct 2021 - 19:54
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26 Joined: 11 Oct 2021 Member No.: 114,346 |
7.7 metres https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5733633,0...6384!8i8192 at the metal join in the carriageway I just found a useful landmark. The camera perspective is misleading but I do like that storm drain cover in the vid. Right near the end of the lane -- which isn't actually signed, adjudicators have noted. https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5734382,0.0...6384!8i8192 Can I include above link and put in my appeal poor condition of bus lane markings and no signage at end? |
|
|
Thu, 14 Oct 2021 - 20:16
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 29,269 Joined: 16 Jan 2008 Member No.: 16,671 |
7.7 metres https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5733633,0...6384!8i8192 at the metal join in the carriageway Thank-you. I assume that rules out de-minimus then? No, the opposite imho. You are very negative? 2210577173 "This personal appeal was conducted as a telephone hearing with the Appellant, Mr Y Patel. I find him to be an honest, convincing and consistent witness I believe what he tells me. The Authority's case is that the Appellant's vehicle was in a bus lane when in Whipps Cross Road on 14 May 2021 at 11.49. The Appellant denies the contravention. I have considered the evidence in this case and I find that this Penalty Charge Notice cannot be upheld for the following reasons: First, I find that the Appellant's vehicle was crossing the end of the bus lane to turn left. Second, I find that the site/map report evidence fails to show the end of the bus lane and/or any relevant markings to show where the bus lane ends. Third, I also find that the distance to the end of this bus lane was too minimal to warrant the issuing of a PCN. Taking these matters together I find that this Penalty Charge Notice is not proved. The appeal is allowed." -------------------- |
|
|
Thu, 14 Oct 2021 - 21:54
Post
#18
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 20,919 Joined: 22 Apr 2012 Member No.: 54,455 |
edit. The correct procedure is for the hire/lease company to submit their own representations and give your name and address. A new PCN should then be sent to you. Others will comment. They can't for a London bus lane. Regarding invalid bus lane cameras (post #4), has this gone to a Tribunal and been successful? Well he gave a relevant case ref? On other matters, a case for the location won on Tuesday. I can't judge from a night vid how close you are to the end of the bus lane but others might recall from previous cases. Mea Culpa ! This just shows the sheer barminess of the legislation around parking and traffic, where one set of legislation has process for a hire company to transfer liability, and one that doesn't . A Dog's Breakfast indeed ! So, OP, the hire company retain full responsibility for that PCN, so I suggest you read your agreement closely to see what happens if you lose an appeal. I suspect they will pay and then off-charge it to you and add in an admin fee. This post has been edited by Incandescent: Thu, 14 Oct 2021 - 21:57 |
|
|
Thu, 14 Oct 2021 - 22:17
Post
#19
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26 Joined: 11 Oct 2021 Member No.: 114,346 |
|
|
|
Thu, 14 Oct 2021 - 23:18
Post
#20
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26 Joined: 11 Oct 2021 Member No.: 114,346 |
Interesting to see that till Aug 2012 the "End of bus lane" sign was well before the actual end of bus lane:
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.573499,0.01...3312!8i6656 Between Aug 2012 to Jul 2014 this was removed and replaced with a sign well ahead of the end of the bus lane: https://www.google.com/maps/@51.57346,0.015...3312!8i6656 Then between Mar 2018 and Apr 2019 this was removed: https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5734389,0.0...6384!8i8192 https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5733922,0.0...6384!8i8192 Don't know why they just couldn't place it in line with the actual end of the bus lane! |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 13:24 |