PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bus Lane contravention
stinkblender
post Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 18:48
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23
Joined: 13 Dec 2018
Member No.: 101,424



OK... please bear with me as I have to word this carefully.

I have received today a Bus Lane Penalty Charge Notice from Bedford Borough. It identifies a vehicle as being in a bus lane. There are two photos. One is a black solid square with what appears to be a dim headlamp and a vehicle's forward registration number plate on it; matching the vehicle identified in the PCN. There is no vehicle or anything else in this pic. At the bottom of the pic is some text which appears to be a date and time, the name of the road the alleged contravention took place on, and the words "bus lane".

The right hand photo shows a section of a Bedford street, and several vehicles; one of which is in the bus lane. The photo is of very poor resolution and the vehicles in it cannot be identified.

Is there anything I can do which would remove the need for me to pay this PCN? Please feel free to ask me for more info or to shout at me for doing something wrong.

Thanks

Here's the PCN with some key details removed.

This post has been edited by stinkblender: Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 18:48
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 35)
Advertisement
post Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 18:48
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
cp8759
post Sat, 19 Jan 2019 - 16:02
Post #21


Member


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



QUOTE (stinkblender @ Sat, 19 Jan 2019 - 14:51) *
I didn't think to get proof of posting so sadly no confirmation. Also I appear (God knows how) to have lost the text I put into it FFS.

Anyway; if I remember right, CPR is clear that it's sufficient for me to state that I sent it as there is no reason to disbelieve me.

Fingers crossed?

The process is a tick box exercise, providing you file it within the 21 day deadline of receiving the OfR, the penalty will be automatically reset.

Did you make any changes to the draft text I put in post 15 above?


--------------------
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
DancingDad
post Sun, 20 Jan 2019 - 09:37
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



I would find what you sent.
The next stage is an Order for Recovery.
That is likely to be followed by referral to an adjudicator who will want to see what you wrote.
It may be that the council did get and reply to your reps.
In which case expect a copy of the NOR and invite to pay, TPT seem to find this acceptable nowadays.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stinkblender
post Wed, 23 Jan 2019 - 23:10
Post #23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23
Joined: 13 Dec 2018
Member No.: 101,424



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Sat, 19 Jan 2019 - 16:02) *
QUOTE (stinkblender @ Sat, 19 Jan 2019 - 14:51) *
I didn't think to get proof of posting so sadly no confirmation. Also I appear (God knows how) to have lost the text I put into it FFS.

Anyway; if I remember right, CPR is clear that it's sufficient for me to state that I sent it as there is no reason to disbelieve me.

Fingers crossed?

The process is a tick box exercise, providing you file it within the 21 day deadline of receiving the OfR, the penalty will be automatically reset.

Did you make any changes to the draft text I put in post 15 above?


Not that I remember, no. I'm very confused why the file is missing; I store everything in the cloud so it should simply be there.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Fri, 25 Jan 2019 - 13:55
Post #24


Member


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



Well if you made no changes to the text, you have a copy in post 15 above.


--------------------
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
stinkblender
post Sat, 4 May 2019 - 15:40
Post #25


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23
Joined: 13 Dec 2018
Member No.: 101,424



OK finally got referred to the Traffic Tribunal... (I submitted to the court that I had sent in representations but had not received a rejection).

I have filled in the Traffic Tribunal's online form with exactly the representations made on 17th Dec. I'm now awaiting further contact from them.

Thanks for all your help guys.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sat, 4 May 2019 - 19:32
Post #26


Member


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



Post the council's case summary on here.


--------------------
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
stinkblender
post Fri, 17 May 2019 - 14:25
Post #27


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23
Joined: 13 Dec 2018
Member No.: 101,424



After Mr Stink Blender submitted a statutory declaration Bedford Borough Council wrote to the address given, offering a further 14 days to pay the original penalty charge.

The penalty charge has not been paid. As a result, the case has been referred to the adjudicator at the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

The adjudicator has considered the case including details of the contravention, and who is liable to pay the penalty charge. The adjudicator is satisfied that:

1. The contravention occurred;
2. The penalty charge is justified;
3. Mr Stink Blender is liable to pay the penalty charge;
4. The notices have been sent to Mr Stink Blender at the address given on the witness statement

This means that:

Mr Stink Blender has 28 days to pay £60 to Bedford Borough Council. If that is not paid within 28 days then Bedford Borough Council may increase the penalty by 50%.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Mr StinkBlender made a statutory declaration on the ground that he made representations to the Council about this penalty charge in response to the PCN but received no response.

The Council did not receive representations from him. Nevertheless, after the Council referred his witness statement to the tribunal, he was invited to join this appeal to explain his case.

Mr StinkBlender explains he challenges the PCN because it alleges the contravention took place in “Ampthill Road”, but the location is not particularised further. He says the traffic regulation order the Council rely on identifies two roads named Ampthill Road where a bus lane exists: one in Bedford and one in the village of Elstow. The PCN does not specify in which town the contravention is alleged to have taken place.

He refers to a decision of the tribunal dealing with bus lane PCNs issued by councils in London. That case concerned a PCN for an alleged contravention in Northolt Road Northbound and the appellant produced evidence of 5 camera enforcement locations in that road. The adjudicator concluded the PCN must allow the PCN to know not just the nature of the alleged contravention but exactly where it is said to have occurred. That appeal was allowed on the basis the PCN did not sufficiently identify the location of the alleged contravention.

Mr StinkBlender is right that the relevant traffic regulation order creates two bus lanes in Ampthill Road, one in Bedford and one in Elstow; and that the PCN he received simply identifies the location of the alleged contravention as Ampthill Road.

The Council explain the contravention relates to the former and there is no enforcement camera on the latter. This distinguishes this case from the one on which Mr StinkBlender relies, where there were multiple cameras. Since the only enforcement camera is on the Ampthill Road, Bedford bus lane there can be no risk of confusion as to which bus lane the Council allege has been contravened.

In any, event, the description of the location as Ampthill Road is not the only information about the location of the alleged contravention in this case. In this case the PCN included a photograph of Mr StinkBlender’s vehicle in the bus lane at the time of the alleged contravention. There is no suggestion such information was included in the PCN in the case Mr StinkBlender refers to. Clearly, a photograph of the alleged contravention shows exactly where in Ampthill Road the alleged contravention occurred.

Consequently, in this case I am satisfied that the PCN sufficiently identifies where the alleged contravention occurred.

Mr StinkBlender does not dispute that the alleged contravention did occur or that he is liable to pay the penalty charge. The Council’s evidence shows this car was in the bus lane in Ampthill Road, Bedford. The bus lane is reserved for buses, authorised vehicles, taxis, motorcycles and cycles at all times. DVLA identified the car as Mr StinkBlender’s and there is no evidence it is a taxi or was authorised to be in the bus lane.

Accordingly, I find the alleged contravention did occur and Mr StinkBlender is liable to pay the penalty charge.

As a result, I see no reason to direct that an appeal is registered in this case; an appeal has no prospect of success. Mr StinkBlender remains liable to pay the penalty charge. He has 28 days from receipt of this decision to do so, failing which the Council may continue to enforce it.Mr StinkBlender made a statutory declaration on the ground that he made representations to the Council about this penalty charge in response to the PCN but received no response.

The Council did not receive representations from him. Nevertheless, after the Council referred his witness statement to the tribunal, he was invited to join this appeal to explain his case.

Mr StinkBlender explains he challenges the PCN because it alleges the contravention took place in “Ampthill Road”, but the location is not particularised further. He says the traffic regulation order the Council rely on identifies two roads named Ampthill Road where a bus lane exists: one in Bedford and one in the village of Elstow. The PCN does not specify in which town the contravention is alleged to have taken place.

He refers to a decision of the tribunal dealing with bus lane PCNs issued by councils in London. That case concerned a PCN for an alleged contravention in Northolt Road Northbound and the appellant produced evidence of 5 camera enforcement locations in that road. The adjudicator concluded the PCN must allow the PCN to know not just the nature of the alleged contravention but exactly where it is said to have occurred. That appeal was allowed on the basis the PCN did not sufficiently identify the location of the alleged contravention.

Mr StinkBlender is right that the relevant traffic regulation order creates two bus lanes in Ampthill Road, one in Bedford and one in Elstow; and that the PCN he received simply identifies the location of the alleged contravention as Ampthill Road.

The Council explain the contravention relates to the former and there is no enforcement camera on the latter. This distinguishes this case from the one on which Mr StinkBlender relies, where there were multiple cameras. Since the only enforcement camera is on the Ampthill Road, Bedford bus lane there can be no risk of confusion as to which bus lane the Council allege has been contravened.

In any, event, the description of the location as Ampthill Road is not the only information about the location of the alleged contravention in this case. In this case the PCN included a photograph of Mr StinkBlender’s vehicle in the bus lane at the time of the alleged contravention. There is no suggestion such information was included in the PCN in the case Mr StinkBlender refers to. Clearly, a photograph of the alleged contravention shows exactly where in Ampthill Road the alleged contravention occurred.

Consequently, in this case I am satisfied that the PCN sufficiently identifies where the alleged contravention occurred.

Mr StinkBlender does not dispute that the alleged contravention did occur or that he is liable to pay the penalty charge. The Council’s evidence shows this car was in the bus lane in Ampthill Road, Bedford. The bus lane is reserved for buses, authorised vehicles, taxis, motorcycles and cycles at all times. DVLA identified the car as Mr StinkBlender’s and there is no evidence it is a taxi or was authorised to be in the bus lane.

Accordingly, I find the alleged contravention did occur and Mr StinkBlender is liable to pay the penalty charge.

As a result, I see no reason to direct that an appeal is registered in this case; an appeal has no prospect of success. Mr StinkBlender remains liable to pay the penalty charge. He has 28 days from receipt of this decision to do so, failing which the Council may continue to enforce it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Fri, 17 May 2019 - 15:12
Post #28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 26,655
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



post documents not transcripts of them, I can only guess what that is


--------------------
All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stinkblender
post Fri, 17 May 2019 - 19:49
Post #29


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23
Joined: 13 Dec 2018
Member No.: 101,424



QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Fri, 17 May 2019 - 16:12) *
post documents not transcripts of them, I can only guess what that is


This is a copy/paste from the tribunal website. There is no "document". Does noone ever use polite manners around here?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Fri, 17 May 2019 - 20:02
Post #30


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 26,655
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (stinkblender @ Fri, 17 May 2019 - 20:49) *
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Fri, 17 May 2019 - 16:12) *
post documents not transcripts of them, I can only guess what that is


This is a copy/paste from the tribunal website. There is no "document". Does noone ever use polite manners around here?

pay up time then


--------------------
All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stinkblender
post Fri, 17 May 2019 - 20:30
Post #31


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23
Joined: 13 Dec 2018
Member No.: 101,424



I figured. I just thought you would like to see the conclusion and its reasons.

You're welcome.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sun, 19 May 2019 - 13:00
Post #32


Member


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



QUOTE (stinkblender @ Fri, 17 May 2019 - 21:30) *
I figured. I just thought you would like to see the conclusion and its reasons.

You're welcome.

Well if you'd posted the council's case summary we might have achieved a different outcome (There's several easy to make rebuttals to what the tribunal has said). Why you proceeded without referring the case back to us, only you know.


--------------------
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
baroudeur
post Sun, 19 May 2019 - 15:14
Post #33


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 938
Joined: 24 Sep 2014
Member No.: 73,212



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Tue, 18 Dec 2018 - 14:19) *
So this is the other bus lane on Ampthill Road: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.1137205,-...33;8i6656?hl=en

As per pages 18 and 19 of the full order here: https://www.scribd.com/document/395948634/B...tion-Order-2014 (grid reference I37 and I38)


A bit late now but..............

I know this location very well and I don't think that the bus lane in the GSV is in Ampthill Road, Elstow. The direction sign clearly indicates Ampthill to the left and maps show that road as Ampthill Road going off under the main line railway bridge. Bedford seems to be lax with names as, although in Elstow parish, this road is in Kempston.

The map within the Order shows no name for the bus lane section of road which is part of the A6. In fact, so far, I can't find a name for it anywhere but it didn't exist at all in 1980 whereas Ampthill Road did exactly as shown on the maps below.

https://tinyurl.com/y4beaqhn

https://tinyurl.com/y5hyuyns
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stinkblender
post Sat, 25 May 2019 - 09:13
Post #34


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23
Joined: 13 Dec 2018
Member No.: 101,424



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Sun, 19 May 2019 - 14:00) *
QUOTE (stinkblender @ Fri, 17 May 2019 - 21:30) *
I figured. I just thought you would like to see the conclusion and its reasons.

You're welcome.

Well if you'd posted the council's case summary we might have achieved a different outcome (There's several easy to make rebuttals to what the tribunal has said). Why you proceeded without referring the case back to us, only you know.


That would be (a) because I come here when something happens; and (b) I never saw the council's "case summary" at any time. The first I saw was the tribunal result - and that online rather than on paper.

I genuinely cannot understand why the people here with experience have to be so downright bloody rude and unfriendly; it's almost as if you hate helping people.

Try lightening up and being kind/approachable/nice to talk to. Maybe then we'd have half a chance of beating this nonsensical scourge of government overreach.

QUOTE (baroudeur @ Sun, 19 May 2019 - 16:14) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Tue, 18 Dec 2018 - 14:19) *
So this is the other bus lane on Ampthill Road: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.1137205,-...33;8i6656?hl=en

As per pages 18 and 19 of the full order here: https://www.scribd.com/document/395948634/B...tion-Order-2014 (grid reference I37 and I38)


A bit late now but..............

I know this location very well and I don't think that the bus lane in the GSV is in Ampthill Road, Elstow. The direction sign clearly indicates Ampthill to the left and maps show that road as Ampthill Road going off under the main line railway bridge. Bedford seems to be lax with names as, although in Elstow parish, this road is in Kempston.

The map within the Order shows no name for the bus lane section of road which is part of the A6. In fact, so far, I can't find a name for it anywhere but it didn't exist at all in 1980 whereas Ampthill Road did exactly as shown on the maps below.

https://tinyurl.com/y4beaqhn

https://tinyurl.com/y5hyuyns



I think they're trying to say that the contravention has occurred just near Morrisons heading towards Bedford away from Elstiow. Thanks for your input.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sat, 25 May 2019 - 16:37
Post #35


Member


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



QUOTE (stinkblender @ Sat, 25 May 2019 - 10:13) *
That would be (a) because I come here when something happens; and (b) I never saw the council's "case summary" at any time. The first I saw was the tribunal result - and that online rather than on paper.

You said on Sat, 4 May 2019 - 16:40 that the case had been referred to the tribunal, I replied in under 4 hours saying that you should post the case summary. You never bothered to answer, or ask what the case summary was or where you might find it. Next we know, it's too late and you've lost the case. We come here give up our time to help strangers like you, if said strangers lose because out advice (such as "Post the council's case summary on here.") is ignored I'm not sure what more you expect.

QUOTE (stinkblender @ Sat, 25 May 2019 - 10:13) *
Try lightening up and being kind/approachable/nice to talk to. Maybe then we'd have half a chance of beating this nonsensical scourge of government overreach.

I don't need to beat anything.

QUOTE (stinkblender @ Sat, 25 May 2019 - 10:13) *
That would be (a) because I come here when something happens; and (b) I never saw the council's "case summary" at any time. The first I saw was the tribunal result - and that online rather than on paper.

Well as I said, I advised you within four hours that you needed to show us the council's case summary, if you'd come here and told us you couldn't find it or whatnot we could have advised further. If you didn't bother coming back to check for replies, there's not much further we could do to help. I'm not sure what more you expect.


--------------------
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
stinkblender
post Tue, 28 May 2019 - 15:31
Post #36


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23
Joined: 13 Dec 2018
Member No.: 101,424



QUOTE
I genuinely cannot understand why the people here with experience have to be so downright bloody rude and unfriendly; it's almost as if you hate helping people.
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: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 12:27
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