PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Pulteney bridge Bath Bus lane PCN, New PCN received for being on Pulteney bridge
liverpoolgreen
post Fri, 11 Jan 2019 - 14:01
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 10 Jan 2019
Member No.: 101,833



Hi

first time on here

I just received a PCN for being on the bus lane on Pulteney bridge.
I was a tourist visiting and didnt notice signs. I used to live there years ago and didnt realise there was a bus lane restriction there now. There is no normal bus lane marking on the road on the bridge.
I entered from Bridge st side.
From what I see from the photo and video there are no markings or signs - but when I look on Google streetview there are signs and some marking on the road before you get to the bridge, or the 'bus gate' entrance.

My PCN also has the 0845 number on the first page. If there was a loophole for this Im surprised the Council continue to print this number on the PCNs.

Im inclined to pay - but would welcome suggestions for any challenge.


Google street view of entrance to bridge https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.3828032,-...3312!8i6656



thanks

copy of the PCN

photo on PCN

This post has been edited by liverpoolgreen: Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 14:30
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
Attached Image
Attached Image
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 23)
Advertisement
post Fri, 11 Jan 2019 - 14:01
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Iconoclast
post Sat, 19 Jan 2019 - 16:35
Post #21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 21 Jul 2017
Member No.: 93,132



I disagree. The video, which is the council's sole evidence, does not show the vehicle passing restriction signs nor road legend.

It is surely not open to the adjudicator to make assumptions. His/her role is to arrive at a decision based on the facts as presented, not to speculate on what may or may not have occurred prior to the time the vehicle was captured on video.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sat, 19 Jan 2019 - 18:06
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (Iconoclast @ Sat, 19 Jan 2019 - 16:35) *
I disagree. The video, which is the council's sole evidence, does not show the vehicle passing restriction signs nor road legend.

It is surely not open to the adjudicator to make assumptions. His/her role is to arrive at a decision based on the facts as presented, not to speculate on what may or may not have occurred prior to the time the vehicle was captured on video.

If, having viewed maps of the area, the adjudicator forms the view that the only possible explanation is that the vehicle must have passed through the restricted section of road, that is a conclusion he is entitled to make on the evidence before him. I'm not saying it's a decision the adjudicator will or even should make, but it is a possibility. If such a decision were made, we would not be able to ask for a review as the decision could not be said to be perverse or irrational.

Don't get me wrong, I think there's a case worth making here, but just because you won your case doesn't mean that liverpoolgreen can be 100% sure his adjudicator will allow his appeal on the same basis.


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iconoclast
post Sun, 20 Jan 2019 - 17:01
Post #23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 21 Jul 2017
Member No.: 93,132



I won't dispute that TPT can be a lottery depending on which side of the bed the adjudicator gets out of on the day.


However, I have always understood that in moving traffic cases the video evidence must show the vehicle passing the restriction signs, but correct me if I am wrong.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Incandescent
post Sun, 20 Jan 2019 - 17:39
Post #24


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,919
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Member No.: 54,455



Unfortunately, the test is "on the balance of probabilities", not "beyond all reasonable doubt" as this is a civil law matter.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
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: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 09:23
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.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here