PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

bus lane infringement
Mcginty
post Tue, 4 Dec 2018 - 20:48
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 53
Joined: 20 Sep 2015
Member No.: 79,518



Hi there
I am a bit of a novice with computers and I am really not sure how this forum works but here goes! I got a bus gate infringement ticket a few weeks ago at Edinburgh Road in Jarrow-one of the top earning bus lanes in the country so I have read. It has apparently raked in over £400k in about 15 months. I freely admit I went through the 'gate' but I think there is a total lack of signage and advance warnings. I wrote an informal appeal to the council but this has been rejected saying is adequate and complies with the current regulations. Whether this is true or not I don't know. If I post some detailed Photoes on here could someone give me an opinion please? I just think the council are using it as a cash cow and I know there has been many many complaints but obviously if more signage is erected the money flow will cease. Apologies if I am in the wrong place with this post but if I am could Admin move to the correct area please?
Mc
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
5 Pages V  « < 3 4 5  
Start new topic
Replies (80 - 97)
Advertisement
post Tue, 4 Dec 2018 - 20:48
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Mcginty
post Sun, 27 Jan 2019 - 17:35
Post #81


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 53
Joined: 20 Sep 2015
Member No.: 79,518



Can I have comment/advice on the council response please?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sun, 27 Jan 2019 - 20:01
Post #82


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 10,465
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



Either give us the link or show us a screenshot or something, we can't really comment on transcribed stuff.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mcginty
post Sat, 2 Feb 2019 - 16:03
Post #83


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 53
Joined: 20 Sep 2015
Member No.: 79,518



I will supply links on Monday and all responses from the council to date and put in one post. There is really nothing new from the council and the only reference to BLAD041 is a blanket one for the whole borough. There is no reference of any permission to the Busgate at Edinburgh Road which is the camera location I am appealing my case on. I assume that as cameras are added for various locations there would need to be a Blad041 for each one?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mcginty
post Mon, 4 Feb 2019 - 13:25
Post #84


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 53
Joined: 20 Sep 2015
Member No.: 79,518



https://imgur.com/a/X3O29Oq

Please see above links to all information supplied by South Tyneside Council in relation to my FOI request re permission for camera approval at Edinburgh Road Busgate location.

As far as I am aware the have not complied with my request. I specifically asked for sight of Blad041 in relation to this Busgate.


This is the last communication I have had from them;

Dear Mr ******



Please find attached a copy of the certificate. This was issued in 2010 and covers the Borough of South Tyneside.



As previously stated, if you are not happy with the response you can request an Internal Review which will be conducted by our Head of Legal Services. If you would like to request an Internal Review please let me know your reasons for requesting a review and I will arrange this.



Regards



Neil Purvis

Information Governance


Can anyone please advise if I should instigate an internal review as in the email response above?

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Mon, 4 Feb 2019 - 13:59
Post #85


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 10,465
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



I wouldn't bother asking for a review, it would seem to be entirely pointless. It's up to them to provide a certificate at the tribunal, it's not up to you to show that it does or doesn't exist.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mcginty
post Mon, 4 Feb 2019 - 20:00
Post #86


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 53
Joined: 20 Sep 2015
Member No.: 79,518



The case has been with the tribunal for a couple of weeks now. Ignoring the tribunal aspect what I want to know is if you think the council has supplied the correct information under my FOI request. If not then I want to persist with this as the permission for the camera is important as if they don't have it then any fines imposed on this busgate would impossible to implement. To my mind they have not complied. Would the BLAD041 not have to specifically mention the location?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Mon, 4 Feb 2019 - 22:27
Post #87


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7,428
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Member No.: 11,355



OP---I've sent a FOI request to the VCA asking for the BLAD041 certificate, a copy of the request for certification and whether the approval was site specific. I doubt that this will be answered before the Tribunal date but one never knows.

The certification might be above board but I am hopeful the request was by APCOA and the certification was addressed to them.

For the immediate future I would concentrate on your other grounds.

The Council's evidence pack (you will get a copy) should include the certification--if not that is a real bonus because their evidence is via an "approved device" and if they can't prove its such then their evidence is shot.

I wouldn't mention the FOI saga since that is another arm of the Council. Let's see what I get back--it may help if you lose the appeal.

Mick
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mcginty
post Tue, 5 Feb 2019 - 12:42
Post #88


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 53
Joined: 20 Sep 2015
Member No.: 79,518



Thanks Mick. The council have finished with responding to me and say I must go for an internal review if not happy. I have copied and pasted below the Blad041 supplied-this is also in a link a couple of posts back. The point I'm trying to make is that the certificate relates to the 'Sea Road Flow System' in South Shields-another part of the borough and is dated 2010. I might be naive but surely the council would require a specific certificate for each location?

Date: 14th June 2010 TRANSPORT ACT 2000 CERTIFICATION OF “APPROVED DEVICES” UNDER ARTICLE 2(b) OF THE BUS LANES (APPROVED DEVICES) (ENGLAND) ORDER 2005 (i.e. for a device that is not: of a description specified in an order made by the Secretary of State under section 20(9) of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 (prescribed devices for the purposes of speeding and other offences); nor a device of a type that was used prior to 1 November 2005 for the purpose of bus lane enforcement under Part II (bus lanes) of the London Local Authorities Act 1996. Certificate Number: BLADM 041 Technical Construction File: SEA/10/TR/9072 RoadFlow Issue 3 System: RoadFlow (with Imperial Civil Enforcement Solutions (ICES) Incident Review Facility) Manufacturer: Systems Engineering and Assessment Ltd, (SEA). I am directed by the Secretary of State to refer to your application for certification of an “approved device” dated 8th March 2010. After a review of the information provided in the technical construction file specified above, the Secretary of State considers that the device described therein is suitable for civil Bus Lane Enforcement in England in the following circumstances. The device may be used by individual Traffic Authorities once they have declared to the Secretary of State, and received an acknowledgement on his behalf, that the certified equipment will be used as supplied by the manufacturer and in accordance with his recommendations or as modified by agreement with the Secretary of State. I consider the device described in your application to be of a type which falls within the description specified in article 2(b) of the Bus Lanes (Approved Devices) (England) Order 2005 as meeting the criteria specified in paragraphs 2 to 6 of the Schedule to that Order and hereby certify it accordingly.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mcginty
post Tue, 19 Feb 2019 - 09:19
Post #89


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 53
Joined: 20 Sep 2015
Member No.: 79,518



you have won this appeal.

There is nothing to pay and the authority will cancel the penalty charge

This is because the alleged bus lane contravention did not occur.

Big success with this one on two counts..the will/may worked and also the fact the council did not even bother to supply any evidence that the camera complies to regulations. I suspect the Blad041 does not exist and that is the likely reason they did not supply it. Thanks so much to you guys. I will upload the full decision when I have a bit more time.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 19 Feb 2019 - 10:04
Post #90


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 10,465
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (Mcginty @ Tue, 19 Feb 2019 - 09:19) *
you have won this appeal.

There is nothing to pay and the authority will cancel the penalty charge

This is because the alleged bus lane contravention did not occur.

Big success with this one on two counts..the will/may worked and also the fact the council did not even bother to supply any evidence that the camera complies to regulations. I suspect the Blad041 does not exist and that is the likely reason they did not supply it. Thanks so much to you guys. I will upload the full decision when I have a bit more time.

If you could give us the PDF of the decision that would be great, as we can then use it as a persuasive precedent in future cases.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Tue, 19 Feb 2019 - 10:30
Post #91


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7,428
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Member No.: 11,355



OP---very well done for seeing it through.

I wouldn't go to the Shields Gazette yet but something is up with the camera certification. I haven't heard back on my FOI yet so I will keep you in the loop for when VCA eventually respond.

Mick
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mcginty
post Tue, 19 Feb 2019 - 12:40
Post #92


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 53
Joined: 20 Sep 2015
Member No.: 79,518



Thanks again for that Mick. I will wait to hear on your FOI then a bit of help tackling the Council would be appreciated. If there is something wrong with the camera location -which I think they don't have, then there is an awful lot of money to be paid back! Should I redact my name on the adjudicators response-not too concerned now if I do or I don't. Jim
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Tue, 19 Feb 2019 - 13:27
Post #93


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7,428
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Member No.: 11,355



I would redact it but ensure you leave in the case number so other appellants can refer to it.

Mick
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 19 Feb 2019 - 19:13
Post #94


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 10,465
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (Mcginty @ Tue, 19 Feb 2019 - 12:40) *
Thanks again for that Mick. I will wait to hear on your FOI then a bit of help tackling the Council would be appreciated. If there is something wrong with the camera location -which I think they don't have, then there is an awful lot of money to be paid back! Should I redact my name on the adjudicators response-not too concerned now if I do or I don't. Jim

To be honest anyone who goes and check the tribunal register will see your full name anyway, so it's much of a muchness. Personally I prefer unredacted copies because it seems a bit silly to quote "Mr X v South Tyneside Council"


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mcginty
post Wed, 20 Feb 2019 - 11:27
Post #95


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 53
Joined: 20 Sep 2015
Member No.: 79,518



Cant upload full PDF but I can do 3 jpegs covering the three pages if that would be okay?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Wed, 20 Feb 2019 - 13:13
Post #96


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 10,465
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (Mcginty @ Wed, 20 Feb 2019 - 11:27) *
Cant upload full PDF but I can do 3 jpegs covering the three pages if that would be okay?

I've sent you a PM, if you just email me the PDF I'll sort it out.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Wed, 20 Feb 2019 - 16:11
Post #97


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 10,465
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



PDF: http://bit.ly/2TYyTGu


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mcginty
post Wed, 20 Feb 2019 - 18:41
Post #98


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 53
Joined: 20 Sep 2015
Member No.: 79,518



Thanks. biggrin.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

5 Pages V  « < 3 4 5
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: Wednesday, 22nd May 2019 - 17:53
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.