Alleged Bus lane Contravention Oxford road (charles street to Brancaster Road), Alleged Bus lane Contravention Oxford road (charles street to Brancast |
Alleged Bus lane Contravention Oxford road (charles street to Brancaster Road), Alleged Bus lane Contravention Oxford road (charles street to Brancast |
Mon, 17 Jun 2019 - 17:40
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 289 Joined: 2 Dec 2017 Member No.: 95,374 |
Hi Guys,
My other work colleague received a bus lane contravention fine. Detection date 07/06/2019 Date of Penalty Charge Notice 12/06/19. I am not sure about the signage on that road, I have not been on this road, just checked Google and I think the signage is not clear meaning it needs to be on the road, as there are too many other signs, traffic lights, so make it more confusing if you new in the area. I don't go Manchester anymore for this reason, as you are not familiar with the area and the last thing you want is stress and more expense. What is likely chance of appealing the Bus lane ticket on Oxford road (charles street to Brancaster Road) https://imgur.com/DEoi6lf https://imgur.com/oZ8Wfun https://imgur.com/91SYr4v https://imgur.com/fljmsZ3 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Mon, 17 Jun 2019 - 17:40
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Mon, 17 Jun 2019 - 17:59
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
We have not seen an appeal lost since the Watkins case
https://1drv.ms/b/s!AtBHPhdJdppVqkNx3g8q3GPKWApV CP has a good draft representation -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Tue, 18 Jun 2019 - 11:30
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
I would keep this short and simple, the council will reject but eventually the tribunal will start making awards for costs (though I have a skeaking suspicion they might only start once the Watkin case is a year old). Send them a copy of this http://bit.ly/2TKSfyu together with the representation below.
------------------------------------------------- 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. There are too many signs, traffic lights and so on, this makes the layout confusing if you new in the area. I have since learnt that the tribunal ruled the signage at this location to be inadequate, I refer you to the decision in Watkin and others v Manchester City Council (MC01044-1808, 29 January 2019) which you have unsuccessfully attempted to have overturned. In light of the consistent decisions of the tribunal over several months, it would be wholly unreasonable to pursue enforcement any further. The outcome of an appeal to the tribunal is as close as it can get in these sorts of matters to a foregone conclusion, as none of the issues identified by the tribunal have been rectified since the site visit of adjudicator Knapp. There is simply no reason to believe that the tribunal would suddenly and out of the blue change its view on the adequacy of the signage, at least until the council does something to improve the layout. It follows that rejecting this representation and causing the case to go to the tribunal would be wholly unreasonable, as well as a waste of everyone's time. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Tue, 18 Jun 2019 - 12:23
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 289 Joined: 2 Dec 2017 Member No.: 95,374 |
Hi Cp8759,
I will keep it short and simple. I will attached the file http://bit.ly/2TKSfyu the four paragraph and send it off to MCC. I will keep you posted of the outcome |
|
|
Wed, 19 Jun 2019 - 10:29
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 289 Joined: 2 Dec 2017 Member No.: 95,374 |
This is what I sent to MCC Appeal, said 21 Days for a reply.
Dear Sir/ Madame, 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. There are too many signs, traffic lights and so on, this makes the layout confusing if you new in the area. I have since learnt that the tribunal ruled the signage at this location to be inadequate, I refer you to the decision in Watkins and others v Manchester City Council (MC01044-1808, 29 January 2019) which you have unsuccessfully attempted to have overturned. In light of the consistent decisions of the tribunal over several months, it would be wholly unreasonable to pursue enforcement any further. The outcome of an appeal to the tribunal is as close as it can get in these sorts of matters to a foregone conclusion, as none of the issues identified by the tribunal have been rectified since the site visit of adjudicator Knapp. There is simply no reason to believe that the tribunal would suddenly and out of the blue change its view on the adequacy of the signage, at least until the council does something to improve the layout. It follows that rejecting this representation and causing the case to go to the tribunal would be wholly unreasonable, as well as a waste of everyone's time. Please see attached Pdf file of previous case and appeals and the Adjudicator mentioned the signs are hopeless and the bus lane contravention did not occur. Kind Regards |
|
|
Fri, 26 Jul 2019 - 14:50
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 289 Joined: 2 Dec 2017 Member No.: 95,374 |
Just keeping you guys up to date received Charge Certificate and they said they have not received appeal or payment.
I told them I did send you the appeal and the below is the email receipt copy. Let see what is their reply. Dear Parking services, Thank you for the letter dated 19/7/2019. I have just spoken to the Objection Enquiries line on 0161 954 9004 and I have been told to send email to representations@manchester.gov.uk and send the email proof of receipt of the appeal against bus lane, which I did send it on the 18th June 2019 and you can see below email for proof of evidence, that I appealed my bus lane ticket on the 18th June 2019. This is the first letter I have received for the Charge Certificate and I am writing this email, as there has been an error from the Manchester city council. I have told the colleague of Manchester city council to log my call and put a note on my bus lane ticket number that I called and I did appeal on the 18th June 2019, he said he will put this in the system and I need write email to representations@manchester.gov.uk explaining and sending proof of receipt received by myself. Please can you look in to it. Many thanks ----- Forwarded message ----- From: "representations@manchester.gov.uk" <representations@manchester.gov.uk> To: " Cc: Sent: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 at 6:57 pm Subject: Appeal against a Bus lane This is an automated response, please do not reply to this email. Thank you for your appeal against a Bus lane which we received on 18/06/2019. Your case will be passed to an officer to review and you should receive a reply within 21 working days. If you have not received a response within 21 working days, please email representations@manchester.gov.uk, quoting your Penalty Charge Notice (ticket number) the 8 digit reference number starting "MC" and the date you submitted the appeal. |
|
|
Fri, 26 Jul 2019 - 16:27
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
Have you got a record of who you spoke to that told you the had not recieved representations? A few M'cr case have gone this route. Almost as if it is deliberate
Regardless of what anyone says there is a defined legal process to have the CC revoked, and at this point it is an automatic tick box process. The next statutory document you will get is called an order for recovery. it is this that starts this revocation procedure so keep an eye out for it This post has been edited by PASTMYBEST: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 - 16:40 -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Fri, 26 Jul 2019 - 17:10
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 289 Joined: 2 Dec 2017 Member No.: 95,374 |
Have you got a record of who you spoke to that told you the had not recieved representations? A few M'cr case have gone this route. Almost as if it is deliberate Regardless of what anyone says there is a defined legal process to have the CC revoked, and at this point it is an automatic tick box process. The next statutory document you will get is called an order for recovery. it is this that starts this revocation procedure so keep an eye out for it I don't know who I spoke to, but it was a male and he just told me over the phone to re-send with the proof of email for the appeal and they will backdate it. I thought of that they might of done it deliberate, but again you don't have any proof and you have to just keep this sort of email as a copy for proof. I don't know if they are doing it to make your life harder, time will tell, if they are playing dirty games. This post has been edited by CYRIL: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 - 17:29 |
|
|
Sat, 27 Jul 2019 - 16:41
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
I thought of that they might of done it deliberate, but again you don't have any proof and you have to just keep this sort of email as a copy for proof. I don't know if they are doing it to make your life harder, time will tell, if they are playing dirty games. I very much doubt it is deliberate, they have no real incentive and it's more likely down to an administrative error or simple incompetence. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Sat, 27 Jul 2019 - 16:50
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
I thought of that they might of done it deliberate, but again you don't have any proof and you have to just keep this sort of email as a copy for proof. I don't know if they are doing it to make your life harder, time will tell, if they are playing dirty games. I very much doubt it is deliberate, they have no real incentive and it's more likely down to an administrative error or simple incompetence. we've seen quite a few premature CC since the Knapp ruling, I wonder how many are scared into paying when they get one. Manchester's behaviour with regards this bus lane has been a disgrace -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Mon, 29 Jul 2019 - 12:42
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 289 Joined: 2 Dec 2017 Member No.: 95,374 |
I was reading article and the Manchester city council came top in issuing pcn, bus lane tickets in the whole of UK more than London.
I have sent an email to Manchester and waiting for their reply now. https://www.petrolprices.com/news/councils-...fines-one-year/ Just adding the email receipt from Manchester City Council, which i sent email after receiving the Charge Certificate ----- Forwarded message ----- From: "Representations@manchester.gov.uk" <Representations@manchester.gov.uk> To: Sent: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 at 6:03 pm Subject: Automated response from Manchester City Council, please do not reply. Thank you for contacting Parking, Bus Lane & CCTV Services. Please note Manchester Parking Services only deal with Penalty Charge Notices issued by us, starting with MC (ie MC12345678) We aim to respond to your correspondence within 10 working days. If you are formally challenging your Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) the amount you are liable to pay will not increase until your representation has been considered and a Formal Notice has been issued to you. Please ensure you have included your PCN Reference Number which starts with MC i.e. MC12345678 and/or your vehicle registration number in the subject heading of your email, as this will ensure your case is dealt with efficiently and promptly. Please resend your email quoting the PCN reference number if this was omitted from your original enquiry. Further information can be found on our website. Please visit www.manchester.gov.uk/parking. This is an automated response, please do not reply to this email. Catherine M Merrick Appeals Manager Parking, Bus Lane & CCTV Services Corporate Core Directorate Manchester City Council PO Box 532 Town Hall Extension Manchester M60 2LA This post has been edited by CYRIL: Tue, 30 Jul 2019 - 16:43 |
|
|
Mon, 23 Sep 2019 - 12:01
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 31 Joined: 13 Sep 2017 Member No.: 94,011 |
After appealing a bus lane fine in line with the above advice, I have just received a reply saying that it has been unsuccessful and they are not cancelling the fine.
The letter says I have the option to appeal to the parking adjudicator. I'm not really clear on how much of an involved process this is, and whether it is worth it for the sake of £30 (TBH, it's more the principal - that road should have BUS LANE painted all over over it in big letters... y'know, like a Bus Lane). Any advice? BTW - for anybody else reading who is planning to appeal through their website - it doesn't work. They never received my original appeal, and I had to chase up via email, submit another one, and eventually just re-submit the appeal for a 3rd time via email. This in itself should be enough to render all their fines invalid in my view, but hey. |
|
|
Mon, 23 Sep 2019 - 12:28
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 20,924 Joined: 22 Apr 2012 Member No.: 54,455 |
Councils rely on most people coughing-up, it gets them lots of money and this bus lane fiasco is a typical example. An adjudicator has excoriated the council for the inadequate signage they have erected, and allowed appeals, yet due to the totally flawed legislation, the council can just carry on enforcing, knowing people will continue to cough-up. There is nothing in the legislation that would allow adjudicators to declare certain restrictions unenforceable and prevent enforcement until corrected.
|
|
|
Mon, 23 Sep 2019 - 13:33
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 31 Joined: 13 Sep 2017 Member No.: 94,011 |
I've appealed to the adjudicator anyway, will see what happens!
|
|
|
Mon, 21 Oct 2019 - 17:17
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 31 Joined: 13 Sep 2017 Member No.: 94,011 |
My appeal to the adjudicator was rejected, looks like the council have managed to cover every base legally, even if not ethically.
It now appears that I have to pay the full price £60, with no option to pay the originally offered 50% discounted charge within 14 days. Is that normal / legal? The letter I received rejecting my initial appeal made no mention of that it just says I have three choices: 1) Pay the reduced £30 2) Miss the 14 day period and pay £60 3) Appeal to the adjudicator. Nowhere does it say that by doing option three I lose the right to then take the reduced charge if unsuccessful! Surely they are not allowed to penalise you for appealing?! This post has been edited by A175: Mon, 21 Oct 2019 - 17:22 |
|
|
Mon, 21 Oct 2019 - 18:16
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
You are not penalized for appealing, the penalty is always £60. You are rewarded for accepting liability with the discount.
Show us your appeal and the decision this is disturbing. I have not noticed any change to the signage -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Mon, 21 Oct 2019 - 18:45
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Show us the tribunal decision in full. We might need to ask for a review.
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Mon, 21 Oct 2019 - 19:28
Post
#18
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
Show us the tribunal decision in full. We might need to ask for a review. And your appeal -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Tue, 22 Oct 2019 - 08:17
Post
#19
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 31 Joined: 13 Sep 2017 Member No.: 94,011 |
Will do - the council's case seemed to be based on them having changed the signage to now be compliant. Whether it is compliant legally or not, it's still not clear, and it's clearly still not doing its job. I don't understand why they are so set on not putting clear markings int he road / large signs explicitly warning of a bus lane.
Adjudicator's Reasons 1. Mr G, as representative and the driver explains he did not see any (blue) signs about a bus lane, a bus lane legend or a thick white line. He says the standard bus lane signing was not present and having looked into it further says the number of penalties issued and appeals means the signage is inadequate. 2. In respect of probable direction / route of approach it seems more likely than not that Mr G used Grafton Street because of the description offered. 3. Mr Hussain for the Council says the Council has since the decisions delivered by the Tribunal changed the advanced warning signs in place. He refers, in particular to evidence pack number 21 and figure 3. 4. The vehicle was recorded on 19th August being driven on Oxford Road. 5. Oxford Road has a bus gate located between Nelson Street and Hathersage Road. The Traffic Signs Manual 2019 describes a bus gate as a short length of bus only street. By definition it is bus lane. 6. The Traffic Order which imposes the restriction here states that motor vehicles except for buses, taxis and permit holder vehicles are prohibited from using the relevant length of road from Monday to Sunday between 6am and 9pm. Outside of those hours no restriction applies. 7. The signing to be used for a bus gate (as opposed to a bus lane) is specified in the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 and the Traffic Signs Manual 2019. The roadside signs used here include diagram 619 at item 12 in Part 2 of Schedule 3 to the 2016 Regulations. The guidance says that the sign should be used where vehicles other than buses, cycles and taxis are permitted to use the road (e.g. permit holders, for access or for loading). A bus gate legend is not prescribed. 8. Photographs taken on 8th August are included in evidence pack 19. The advance warning signs are particularly large because of the information about the restriction ahead and times of operation of it. There are three advance warning signs on Grafton Street. The bus gate itself has signs to diagram 619 on either side of the road. The 619 sign is a standard sign frequently used to indicate a prohibition on vehicle access. It is sometimes called the “flying motorcycle sign” because of the symbols used. All motorists are required and expected to know what signs correctly in place mean and require. 9. I am satisfied and find an approach using Grafton Street because of the larger signs in place means that adequate advance warning of the restriction ahead is given. The fact that all of the signs may not have been seen or missed, doesn't mean they were not in place and there to be seen. 10. In the recording I can see there is a bus ahead which is stopped at the bus stop to the Adjudicator's Decision 10. In the recording I can see there is a bus ahead which is stopped at the bus stop to the nearside, beyond the start of the bus gate. There are no vehicles approaching in the opposite direction. I find because of what I can see there were no large or high sided vehicles which might have obscured the signs to either the left or right of the bus gate. 11. I am satisfied and find because of what I can see in respect of the signs and their positions that they are adequate to convey the restriction and times of operation to a motorist on approach travelling at a reasonable and prudent speed for the location and conditions. I find because the signs are correct and the fact the vehicle was recorded being driven through the bus gate that the contravention occurred. 12. For completeness it is appropriate to confirm that the decision of “Watkins v M.C.C” (MC01044-1808) referred to was delivered on 29th January 2019. The advance signs were changed in May 2019. 13. This appeal has been lost and the penalty of sixty pounds is payable. You are not penalized for appealing, the penalty is always £60. You are rewarded for accepting liability with the discount. OK, so you are bribed not to appeal. Which amounts to exactly the same thing. But more to the point, this isn't made clear. The initial notice of rejection gave 14 days from the date of rejection to still take the reduced amount, and there's nothing which suggests this would not also be the case with the appeal. |
|
|
Wed, 23 Oct 2019 - 13:15
Post
#20
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
We need to see whatever is in evidence pack 19, and the council's case summary.
The discount thing is quite clear: you have 14 days to pay the discount and if you miss the 14 day deadline, the discount is lost. If this were not the case, everybody would appeal everything just for the sake of it, and the tribunal would be swamped. This post has been edited by cp8759: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 - 13:17 -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 22:41 |