PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Are "Outer Controlled ZONE" signs enforceable?
Graeme311
post Thu, 3 Oct 2013 - 18:31
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 3 Oct 2013
Member No.: 65,663



According to The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002, "Outer Controlled ZONE" signs are not lawful, unless I am missing something?

This is from the document and an image of one of the signs

Controlled ZONE Signage (Schedule 2)
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/3113/schedule/2/made (Scroll down to page 105)


Permitted Variants (Schedule 16, Items 38 and 39)
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/31...chedule/16/made


Example:


Many thanks,

G

This post has been edited by Graeme311: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 - 18:32
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 7)
Advertisement
post Thu, 3 Oct 2013 - 18:31
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Mad Mick V
post Thu, 3 Oct 2013 - 19:37
Post #2


Member


Group: Closed
Posts: 9,710
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Member No.: 11,355



Looks like you are correct.

The insertion of the word "Outer" is not a permitted variant as far as I can see from the primary legislation and 2 Amendments.

I wouldn't put much weight on this being any use to you because adjudicators have the habit of ruling that defective signage is substantially compliant if it conveys the necessary message.

Might as well post up the PCN and let members give their advice.

Mick
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Bogsy_*
post Thu, 3 Oct 2013 - 21:30
Post #3





Guests






Have you checked with the council or DfT that the sign is not an authorised variant?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Graeme311
post Thu, 3 Oct 2013 - 21:36
Post #4


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 3 Oct 2013
Member No.: 65,663



QUOTE (MAD MICK V @ Thu, 3 Oct 2013 - 20:37) *
Looks like you are correct.

The insertion of the word "Outer" is not a permitted variant as far as I can see from the primary legislation and 2 Amendments.

I wouldn't put much weight on this being any use to you because adjudicators have the habit of ruling that defective signage is substantially compliant if it conveys the necessary message.

Might as well post up the PCN and let members give their advice.

Mick


That's my thought, worth a go on appeal before any court action I suppose.
It's not my PCN, but I'll see if I can get a copy

QUOTE (Bogsy @ Thu, 3 Oct 2013 - 22:30) *
Have you checked with the council or DfT that the sign is not an authorised variant?


I thought that legislation is what these things go by, not what the councils or some department decide to do outside of the law otherwise they could put up 100MPH speed limits in their town? - I don't know, can they?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Bogsy_*
post Thu, 3 Oct 2013 - 21:43
Post #5





Guests






Legislation allows a council to apply to use non prescribed traffic signs. The sign is not prescribed therefore it needs to be authorised by the DfT, if it's not then the sign is unlawful.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
clark_kent
post Thu, 3 Oct 2013 - 23:09
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,964
Joined: 27 Aug 2007
From: Brighton
Member No.: 13,358



QUOTE (Graeme311 @ Thu, 3 Oct 2013 - 19:31) *
Permitted Variants (Schedule 16, Items 38 and 39)
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/31...chedule/16/made

G


surely the permitted variant in 39.1 covers it? 'outer' is a name identifying a parking zone is it not?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Graeme311
post Thu, 3 Oct 2013 - 23:16
Post #7


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 3 Oct 2013
Member No.: 65,663



QUOTE (clark_kent @ Fri, 4 Oct 2013 - 00:09) *
QUOTE (Graeme311 @ Thu, 3 Oct 2013 - 19:31) *
Permitted Variants (Schedule 16, Items 38 and 39)
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/31...chedule/16/made

G


surely the permitted variant in 39.1 covers it? 'outer' is a name identifying a parking zone is it not?


I could understand if they put a town, street or other actual place name since that is a valid name of a known, defined area. I don't think "Outer", "ABC" or "Unlucky" etc can be deemed a "name" of something unless it's clearly explained there and then.

Maybe they could win on this point though, any thoughts?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Fri, 4 Oct 2013 - 06:28
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35,063
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



What's unclear, and unlawful, about "Outer"?

As posted above, Schedule 16, s39 seems perfectly clear:

(1) A symbol, logo, number, letter or letters (capitals, lower case or both), or name identifying a parking zone or parking permit identification may be added or varied as appropriate.

If you have a PCN, pl post.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

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 - 19:08
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