Southwark council Lower Road Bus lane PCN Options

[Purple26]

Hi everyone,

I received a pcn for entering a buslane on lower road towards culling road. I had no clue that i had comittend any offence until i received the pcn in the post. There was a lot of heavy rainfall on the day and it was dark at the time. I suspect this was the reason i didnt see the sign for buslane. I didnt expect the council to show me any sympathy for this, so although i did mention this to the council when contesting the pcn, my main argument was for ' vauge locus'. My internet research revealed that someone had successfully used this as a valid reason under similar circumstances ( see link.. .
https://moneyboxjunction.wordpress.com/2007...08/vague-locus/ ).

Not surprisingly I received a letter of rejection. The council stated there were clear signs for the buslane but they completely ignored my point about vauge locus. Of note, the photographs were extremely poor. You can barely see the number plates on most photographs with the exception of one where they seemed to have zoomed in. I don't know if this kind of camera is legal?? I sent another letter to the council explaining my reasons for contesting the pcn (poor visibility and vague locus) and again I was met with another rejection.

Since then, I have seen the road layout on Google Earth which shows Lower Road at the junction of Culling Road which is the location of the alleged contravention according to the council. So to be honest, I'm not sure if my point vague locus will stand? I now have seven days to pay the now doubled fine of £130 or to take this to an independent adjudicator. Can you please advise. Thanks.

I have attached screen shots of all the relevant corespondance between myself and the council in chronological order and the photographs.

A final point is, I have been writing these letters on behalf of my brother who is a registered keeper but not the driver at the time.


Links for letters in chronological order

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/3489/4lshJA.jpg

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/4176/hm4y8m.jpg


https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img922/7008/CeiJah.jpg

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/1336/ix1425.jpg


Links of images provided by council

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/9198/UMX919.jpg

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/1840/43YhRu.jpg

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img922/2892/D9PbfP.jpg

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img922/1912/smSfBW.jpg

Links for google earth image of location


https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img922/9402/eRCROq.jpg

Links for pcn and enforcemnet notice

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img922/2922/zwMXZ6.jpg

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/4269/Vivs9N.jpg

Other images

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/4277/0bUQKz.jpg

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/5131/hGxGLc.jpg

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/2563/sxopjW.jpg

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/237/dk7u5n.jpg

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img922/7503/1slE7H.jpg

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img922/9409/VXu7OK.jpg





This post has been edited by Purple26: Thu, 20 Jan 2022 - 14:42

Attached thumbnail(s)

 

[Advertisement]

[Incandescent]

If the discount has not been re-offered it is a no-brainer to take them to adjudication because the penalty remains the same at £130. Who was the driver is irrelevant, the legislation makes the keeper liable.

[Purple26]

If the discount has not been re-offered it is a no-brainer to take them to adjudication because the penalty remains the same at £130. Who was the driver is irrelevant, the legislation makes the keeper liable.

If it goes to adjudicator, does this means the driver may need to attend physically? I dont want to put my brother ( the driver) through the hassle if this is the case and would rather just pay. Is it possible for me attend instead( im not the keeper)?

Also do you think i have a resonable case based on arguments mentioned above... i heard there is a possibility I may have to pay even more of it goes to adjudicator and he/ she feels council and courts time has been wasted.

[Neil B]

If the discount has not been re-offered it is a no-brainer to take them to adjudication because the penalty remains the same at £130. Who was the driver is irrelevant, the legislation makes the keeper liable.

If it goes to adjudicator, does this means the driver may need to attend physically? I dont want to put my brother ( the driver) through the hassle if this is the case and would rather just pay. Is it possible for me attend instead( im not the keeper)?

Also do you think i have a resonable case based on arguments mentioned above... i heard there is a possibility I may have to pay even more of it goes to adjudicator and he/ she feels council and courts time has been wasted.

Appeals are held over the telephone or by post.
You can represent, with his permission but you've been lucky to get a rejection so far as you had no right without his written authority.
Whoever told you what you "heard" is talking nonsense. Costs a very, very, very rarely awarded to councils.

We need to see the PCN and Enforcement Notice; both in full, obscuring only name and address.
But use a different image site as those so far are almost unreadable.

[Incandescent]

+1
As Neil B says, costs are very rarely awarded to councils, and only if the adjudicator decided the appeal was frivolous which in your case it cannot possibly be: -

There was a lot of heavy rainfall on the day and it was dark at the time. I suspect this was the reason i didnt see the sign for buslane.

Councils never accept there are any deficiencies in their signing even though we all know the maintenance of roads and their signs is pretty poor at the best of times.
My opinioin is you'd be foolish to just cough up now. Of course if they had re-offered the discount it would be different, because going to adjudication is always something of a gamble, but here you've nothing to lose.

[Purple26]

If the discount has not been re-offered it is a no-brainer to take them to adjudication because the penalty remains the same at £130. Who was the driver is irrelevant, the legislation makes the keeper liable.

If it goes to adjudicator, does this means the driver may need to attend physically? I dont want to put my brother ( the driver) through the hassle if this is the case and would rather just pay. Is it possible for me attend instead( im not the keeper)?

Also do you think i have a resonable case based on arguments mentioned above... i heard there is a possibility I may have to pay even more of it goes to adjudicator and he/ she feels council and courts time has been wasted.

Appeals are held over the telephone or by post.
You can represent, with his permission but you've been lucky to get a rejection so far as you had no right without his written authority.
Whoever told you what you "heard" is talking nonsense. Costs a very, very, very rarely awarded to councils.

We need to see the PCN and Enforcement Notice; both in full, obscuring only name and address.
But use a different image site as those so far are almost unreadable.

Hi thanks for the help folks. Neil B i have updated links including screenshots of pcn and enforcemnet notice. Also i did have written permission from my brother to write on his behalf and i can see there is an option for me to represent him when taking the case to adjudicator so will definitely pursue this. I will type up a draft and post on here before sending. Any input will be much appreciated.

Just a few questions

1) so far i have only made my case on the basis of two points to the council namely poor visibility and vague locus. Shall i restate same arguments? Is there anything else that might be worth mentioning to help my case? Ive noticed some mention of illegal cameras and even subtle differrence in wording / typos on pcns that can form basis of appeals. Not sure any of this applies to me?

Also is there any other type of evidence i can collect to reinforce my points... eg. Driving to location and taking pics at night?

2) does it make any difference to adjudicators decision if i attend in person or opt for postal decision. I am willing to attend in person if it helps.

[Neil B]

We need all pages of the notices.

They've cocked up the payment period again, this time on the EN.
Also absent a date of issue?

Just get the appeal registered and select a hearing date.

Just say > 'I rely on my representations and will advise any further matters that arise.'

You don't need detail yet.

[Purple26]

We need all pages of the notices.

They've cocked up the payment period again, this time on the EN.
Also absent a date of issue?

Just get the appeal registered and select a hearing date.

Just say > 'I rely on my representations and will advise any further matters that arise.'

You don't need detail yet.

Not sure what other pages you needed so i just added a bunch of other images in my orginal post. The last two images are of letters of response to appeal from southwark council. Let me know if this is what you need or anything else please.

How did the mess up on payment period? And i thought date of issue is stated on pcn and en ..25/10/21?

Anyway thanks for info. I will get appeal registered. Do you think it matters i apply for decision via post or to attend in person? Ie is it likely to affect outcome of adjudicators decision?

[Neil B]

Not sure what other pages you needed so i just added a bunch of other images in my orginal post.

ALL the remaining page(s) of the EN.

But your images are still doing my head in.
We've gone from one host where awkwardly small to Imgur which is too small but can be enlarged --- but to such a ridiculous size that scrolling around them takes an age.

Try Flickr maybe or put them in a cloud drive and link.

Legislation prescribes mandatory content for notices. Yours have lots wrong or missing.
You don't need to understand right now; we just need to check.

There will be a further useful point yet, concerning camera authorisation and I'll flag up the appropriate member.

[cp8759]

Purple26 I can see all the images fine, but for ease of reference could you please put everything in a google drive folder and share a link to the folder on here?

Southwark council's cameras will not be authorised for bus lane enforcement under the relevant legislation, this has won before, see Karine Reinton v London Borough of Bromley (2210250967, 06 July 2021) https://bit.ly/3dQvhSQ

However this is a very technical argument and most adjudicators have not heard it before. To stand any chance the registered keeper will need me to represent the, which I'm happy to do of course.

[Purple26]

Purple26 I can see all the images fine, but for ease of reference could you please put everything in a google drive folder and share a link to the folder on here?

Southwark council's cameras will not be authorised for bus lane enforcement under the relevant legislation, this has won before, see Karine Reinton v London Borough of Bromley (2210250967, 06 July 2021) https://bit.ly/3dQvhSQ

However this is a very technical argument and most adjudicators have not heard it before. To stand any chance the registered keeper will need me to represent the, which I'm happy to do of course.

Sorry guys as you may have guessed its my first time posting on here. Anyway i have now uploaded everything on google drive. Hope this helps.

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1FN9...V1v91mt07RferNG


Cp8759, that's kind of you to offer. This will require me to put your full name on the notice of appeal.l under section 3 entitled ' authorised representative ' .

Shall i select postal or personal for preferred hearing type?

In the section ' details of appeal' i will write ' i rely on my representations and will advise any further matters that arise ' as Neil B mentioned.

Let me know of this is ok or for any other info you need.

[Neil B]

Thanks.
So if we number the images left to right, continuing on the next row, PCN is 1 and EN 2 but what further images go with each of those?

Either way there is so much wrong and one massively important bit of info missing.

[Purple26]

So i have renamed the images and have also attached a pdf of my letters of appeal and rejection from council. Hope this helps. Let me know if theres anything else please.

[cp8759]

Cp8759, that's kind of you to offer. This will require me to put your full name on the notice of appeal.l under section 3 entitled ' authorised representative ' .

Shall i select postal or personal for preferred hearing type?

Drop me a PM and we can sort out the logistics for the appeal. Please log the appeal online rather than by using the paper form, and request a personal hearing (these can be done by telephone rather than face to face).

[cp8759]

Outcome:

Mr cp8759 has attended the hearing by telephone as the authorised representative of Mr Purple26 and Mr Alan Whitlock has attended for the Council, also by telephone.

This PCN was issued for the alleged contravention of being in a bus lane in Lower Road at 11.20pm on 20 October 2021.

In his initial representations to the Council, Mr Purple26 said that there was very poor visibility that night due to the heavy rainfall. The Council responded to that representation saying that it was unfortunate that Mr Purple26 was faced with poor weather conditions but that it was still up to drivers to be aware of the bus lane signs. Whilst it is undoubtedly correct that it remains the responsibility of drivers to be alert to signage in poor weather conditions, this does not address the issue of whether or not that signage was adequate on the night in question. Mr Purple26's representation could perhaps have been more focused on the adequacy of the signage in the prevailing conditions.

Mr Whitlock accepts that the response did not go on to address the adequacy of the signage. Having looked at the CCTV footage, the weather conditions were bad, with heavy rain. I am unable to see any Bus Lane legend on the road surface either in the footage or in the library images submitted by the Council. I can see the sign with the bus lane restrictions at the beginning of the bus lane. The sign is not illuminated and I simply do not know how this sign would have appeared to Mr Purple26 driving at night in these conditions. It may be that the signage and markings were adequate but, on the evidence available today, I cannot be satisfied that such was the case and I allow the appeal for that reason.

The Charge Certificate in this case was issued on 1 February 2022 which was after the Notice of Appeal had been received by London Tribunals on 24 January 2021. Mr Whitlock believes that this may have resulted from IT issues at the Council. Whilst it is obviously important that Charge Certificates are not issued prematurely, I am satisfied that this was a system error and certainly not unreasonable conduct of the appeal process such as might merit consideration of an award of costs.

Sean Stanton-Dunne
2220063183
1 March 2022

It seems the adjudicator didn't want to get involved in the potentially controversial issue of the camera authorisation.

[Incandescent]

It seems the adjudicator didn't want to get involved in the potentially controversial issue of the camera authorisation.

I'll bet !! If he did he'd be admitting they have been a load of pillocks for the last 20 years or so.

Useful judgement that the weather conditions can be cited to support inadequate signage.

This post has been edited by Incandescent: Wed, 2 Mar 2022 - 17:18

[cp8759]

I almost forgot, I got the camera information under FOI:















Even if we ignore the minor detail that the camera is not authorised under the 1996 Act, all the information I can find is that the LaneWatch MK3HD camera first came onto the market in 2018, so it is not entirely clear how a certificate from April 2010 could cover it

[Purple26]

Thanks to everyones for their help, especially cp8759! Amazing people.🙏🙏🙏