PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Another Oxford Rd - Manchester PCN
farenheit
post Wed, 16 May 2018 - 12:46
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35
Joined: 16 May 2018
Member No.: 97,987



Having had a read through it seems like it's a common theme for a bus lane PCN in Manchester. Seems like their graduates did a good job with their strategic sign placements.!
For me, i was visiting Manchester from Birmingham, went to Trafford centre and left there to go to wilmslow rd (or whatever its called) for a bite on the may bank holiday weekend (Sunday).
Yesterday 15th May received this notice.
Am i right in thinking i should just pay it and be done with it?
For the record im really quite good with signs/bus lanes etc but this one got me when i turned into this road from god knows which road. Sorry not familiar with the place.
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4 Pages V  « < 2 3 4  
Start new topic
Replies (60 - 68)
Advertisement
post Wed, 16 May 2018 - 12:46
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
cp8759
post Wed, 12 Sep 2018 - 18:00
Post #61


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,605
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



Draft grounds of appeal, let's see if we can turn the tables on them. Download and attach all the PDFs of the decisions linked in this post: http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?s=&...t&p=1406364

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

As the signage was inadequate, the alleged contravention did not occur. At the time of the alleged contravention, I saw no bus lane signs, there were no advance warning signs and there was nothing that gave a reasonably observant motorist warning that they are entering a bus lane. Upon viewing the video evidence I note there are two "no motor vehicle" signs either side of the cycle lane on the near-side, but these appear to relate to the cycle lane rather than the main carriageway. At the time of the alleged contravention no signs were visible to me on my offside due to the presence of oncoming buses. There were no road markings to suggest the road ahead was a bus lane or bus gate. I am to date still not sure which signs the council is relying on for the purposes of this alleged contravention.

I have since learnt that a large number of motorists have found themselves in this position and the signage has been found to be inadequate at numerous adjudications. The tribunal has consistently ruled that the signage at this location is inadequate, as illustrated by MC00060-1801 where the adjudicator descried the signage as "hopeless":

"Mr XXX (senior) took part in the telephone hearing on behalf of his son, the Appellant. Mr YYY represented the Council.

Mr YYY told me that the Council had not changed the signage in this location since two previous decisions had made plain that the signage was inadequate. Mr YYY said the Council were urgently looking at the possible remedies but that this was not a matter with which he was personally involved. Mr YYY reiterated that in their view the signage was technically correct but conceded that its placement was not ideal.

Indeed it is fair to say that the signage in this location, technically correct or not, is hopeless. It gives the distinct impression of applying only to the adjacent cycle lane and not to that part of the carriageway which is intended to be restricted to buses (and other authorised vehicles) only. The signage fails to satisfy Regulation 18 of the Local Authority Traffic Orders (Procedure) Regulations 1996.

Mr XXX raised a further point: he asserted that the penalty charge notice (PCN) was served out of time. He described his calculations and, upon looking at the Regulations and a calendar, I agree with him. The PCN was only just out of time but it was, nevertheless, served too late to be enforceable.

The appeal is therefore allowed for two reasons: first, that no contravention occurred because the signage intended to warn motorists of the restriction was inadequate; and, second, because the PCN itself was served later than the Regulations permit.
"

The situation has not improved over time, as demonstrated by the following appeals:

MC00752-1712 (29 January 2018)
MC00816-1712 (30 January 2018)
MC00729-1711 (31 January 2018)
MC00014-1801 (14 February 2018)
MC00642-1805 (7 June 2018)

I attach copies of these decisions for reference.

In light of the consistent decisions of the tribunal over a period of many months, not only is the council's decision to contest this appeal unreasonable, but it is wholly unreasonable, as any reasonable authority in the position of Manchester City Council would understand that it is bound to lose the appeal and it will continue to lose appeal after appeal until the signage issues identified by the tribunal are addressed.

Until then, for the council to push these cases to adjudication is not only wholly unreasonable, I submit it is also an abuse of process. Causing a motorist to appeal to the tribunal when the authority knows (or should know) that the appeal is virtually bound to be successful cannot be anything other than an abuse of process. In light of this I invite the tribunal to make an order for costs against the respondent in the amount of £72, calculated as 4 hours at £19 per hour which represents the time I have spent researching the law and preparing my submissions.


--------------------
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
farenheit
post Wed, 12 Sep 2018 - 18:29
Post #62


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35
Joined: 16 May 2018
Member No.: 97,987



Wow! Thanks
Shall I wait before submitting? biggrin.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Wed, 12 Sep 2018 - 18:35
Post #63


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,605
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



No need to wait, if anything else crops up you can send further evidence right up to the deadline.


--------------------
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
farenheit
post Wed, 12 Sep 2018 - 19:49
Post #64


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35
Joined: 16 May 2018
Member No.: 97,987



When im adding the evidence it is asking me to choose a category.
Any particular one i should select?
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
farenheit
post Wed, 12 Sep 2018 - 20:21
Post #65


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35
Joined: 16 May 2018
Member No.: 97,987



I decided to go with "Case Status Report/System report"
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Fri, 14 Sep 2018 - 21:41
Post #66


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,605
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



If you're referring to the previous tribunal decisions, I would have gone with "other" but it doesn't matter, once the adjudicator opens them it should be pretty obvious what they are. Are you doing for a postal decision, a telephone hearing or a hearing in person?


--------------------
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
farenheit
post Sat, 15 Sep 2018 - 12:20
Post #67


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35
Joined: 16 May 2018
Member No.: 97,987



I have no idea, I’d prefer postal?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Sat, 15 Sep 2018 - 12:44
Post #68


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,480
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (farenheit @ Wed, 12 Sep 2018 - 21:21) *
I decided to go with "Case Status Report/System report"



bit of a flaw with the software, its all titled to support the council. I was told use other but as CP says no matter the adjudicator will know
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sun, 16 Sep 2018 - 13:31
Post #69


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,605
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (farenheit @ Sat, 15 Sep 2018 - 13:20) *
I have no idea, I’d prefer postal?

Then go for that, and let us know the outcome.


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

4 Pages V  « < 2 3 4
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, 20th September 2018 - 23:18
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.