Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Bus Lane Offence
FightBack Forums > Queries > Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices
No Way
Hello
I have recently been sent a request for cash and a photo by Manchester City Council that shows my car "about" to head down a bus lane. The thing is, I didn't go down it. Am I allowed to ask them for footage that covers the rest of my car's path? From the attached photo, my car is arrowed. At the time I was just trying to stay left, as you do, and then noticed that the upcoming fork meant that only buses could go left, so I veered right. Where the "X" is, is where my car ends up. In the photo, I'm not as yet in the bus lane, which starts only where the fork is.
StuartBu
QUOTE (No Way @ Tue, 5 Jul 2016 - 12:41) *
Hello
I have recently been sent a request for cash and a photo by Manchester City Council that shows my car "about" to head down a bus lane. The thing is, I didn't go down it. Am I allowed to ask them for footage that covers the rest of my car's path? From the attached photo, my car is arrowed. At the time I was just trying to stay left, as you do, and then noticed that the upcoming fork meant that only buses could go left, so I veered right. Where the "X" is, is where my car ends up. In the photo, I'm not as yet in the bus lane, which starts only where the fork is.


Can you say where in Mancs that is or provide a GSV link to the locus .Looks a right pigs breakfast of a junction .
JC Denton
The scan is fairly terrible, but it looks like there are a pair of no access signs directly behind your vehicle - one above the bus in the bottom of the image and one to the left of the cycle lane running up from the left handside of the bus.

A streetview location will help...

JC
Jlc
There's a longitude / latitude in the picture - the location here doesn't seem to fully match the scan but the layout may have changed recently.

The scan is poor but that appears to be the quality given to the OP... It does appear the 'no cars' sign has already been passed at the point of capture.

However, this thread should be in the decrim section.
DancingDad
Could we have a copy of the PCN please and a streetview link to the junction.
Looks a right pigs ear from the photo
StuartBu
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Tue, 5 Jul 2016 - 15:24) *
Could we have a copy of the PCN please and a streetview link to the junction.
Looks a right pigs ear from the photo

Great minds think alike!!!
No Way
Thanks for the responses.

PCN is here...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/143852524@N08...eposted-public/

I've looked on Google Earth to try to get a screenshot but I think the layout has changed. Should I ask Manchester city council for more details?

I'm not sure which sign it is that I have already passed, but surely there has to be a marking, a line, on the floor that indicates the beginning of a bus lane? If in this case the sign is the cut off mark, then all cars, whether they head left down the bus fork or down the right fork, will be guilty because they have all passed the sign and are on that road, no?

Thanks
PASTMYBEST
No PCN, is it Portland st at Piccadilly gardens?
StuartBu
QUOTE (No Way @ Wed, 6 Jul 2016 - 06:43) *
Thanks for the responses.

PCN image uploaded (I hope).

I've looked on Google Earth to try to get a screenshot but I think the layout has changed.

I'm not sure which sign it is that I have already passed, but surely there has to be a marking, a line, on the floor that indicates the beginning of a bus lane? If in this case the sign is the cut off mark, then all cars, whether they head left down the bus fork or down the right fork, will be guilty because they have all passed the sign and are on that road, no?

Thanks


It's Google Maps you need to look at and then switch to Google Street View.. just tell us where this location is.. you must know where it is?
PASTMYBEST
Here I think

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.4793225,-...3312!8i6656
Hippocrates
Ask for the video and question the inadequate warning signage, in my view i.e. the sign with the tapered dotted line. See Traffic Signs Manual for proper signage i.e. Chapter Three.
big_mac
The layout has changed since streetview, but it seems that the entire section of road is now a bus lane.

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/new...monday-10996792
It is also possible to view the images online - although they don't show it much more clearly, you can see the car has just driven along a section of red tarmac.
No Way
I'm not overly familiar with the centre of Manchester. I do know that it is Portland Street, and possibly PASTMYBEST is correct with his assumption (I can't work out exactly where it is but I would say just before the right hand turning into Minshull street, Manchester). As people here have pointed out, the layout has changed since Google took pictures. The fork to the right IS for cars, though. I know that the floor markings would be the edges of the cycle lane, either side of the bus bit, but that photo certainly doesn't show me being IN the bus lane. Should I just object on that basis (saying I never entered it), because their photo doesn't prove I did. Or should I ask for the video as Hippocrates has suggested? Or Both? Thanks again.
PASTMYBEST
As for the video, but keep an eye on deadlines, if the video is not seen before then make your representations in that you did not enter the bus lane
as you say

Also post up the rest of the pcn so we can check it for errors
big_mac
QUOTE (No Way @ Fri, 8 Jul 2016 - 08:16) *
The fork to the right IS for cars, though.

The picture clearly shows you have just passed between a pair of signs with a vehicular restriction on them - and immediately after a large section of red tarmac (presumably indicating a bus lane, but any writing on it is covered by a bus in the picture).

The MEN article also describes this section as a bus lane.
(This is just after the Minshull street turning).

There may be some other angles to approach this, either via the PCN or the signage, but if your only hope is that you didn't actually enter a bus lane, then I think you may be better taking the discount while you can.
Steve_999
Slightly better image. . . .

PASTMYBEST
There could be an argument that, this is not a bus lane or gate but a restricted street. I do not think Manchester can enforce those, rather they are a police matter

MMV's input would help
DancingDad
I really would like to see what is before that intersection.
There is red tarmac, which is suggestive of a bus lane.
But what signs, warnings etc are in place.
The No Motor Vehicle signs we can see can be used for bus or pedestrian only areas and seems little doubt the OP passed them.
But without knowing what preceded, there seems like no escape when a motorist comes upon them.

Who left the door open BTW, Hippo snuck back in smile.gif
No Way
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Fri, 8 Jul 2016 - 14:36) *
There could be an argument that, this is not a bus lane or gate but a restricted street. I do not think Manchester can enforce those, rather they are a police matter

MMV's input would help


MMV?
DancingDad
QUOTE (No Way @ Fri, 8 Jul 2016 - 17:42) *
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Fri, 8 Jul 2016 - 14:36) *
There could be an argument that, this is not a bus lane or gate but a restricted street. I do not think Manchester can enforce those, rather they are a police matter

MMV's input would help


MMV?

Mad Mick
Often manages to track down traffic orders and other legislative bits.
No Way
Apparently I was wrong earlier when I said that the right lane "is" for cars. This from a mate: " I realise where this is - top of Portland Street. You've had it, mate. It's not specifically a bus lane, but the whole road from that point is restricted to buses, taxis and cyclists. That's what the red circle signs are on either side. It took me by surprise when I went up there a couple of months back, as it was new since I had last been to Manc. Just before that there is a blue and white arrow sign saying you MUST turn right, in between Yates's and the Portland Thistle (unless you're a bus or a taxi). Whether you bore left or right at that point makes no difference. The red tarmac is also irrelevant. It's there purely to highlight road markings (bus lanes, pedestrian crossings, give way lines etc) so there will be something written on top of it. After you passed the two red circle signs, though, you were in trouble".
Hippocrates
I see no bus lane signage. The Traffic Penalty Tribunal may have any operational TRO/Traffic Regulation Order for this alleged location.
No Way
Full PCN here. Three pages to scroll through (they have sent me Section 1, 3, 4, but no Section 2).

https://www.flickr.com/photos/143852524@N08...eposted-public/
PASTMYBEST
I try my best to avoid Manchester city centre, it' s nightmare. There are that many roadwork's going on.

I did notice last time I had to be there that, I was diverted, followed the diversion then end up at a no vehicles restriction. Basically the only route that I could take was round in circles
being turned back on my self. I eventually gave up dropped my passenger and went home.

This case from a while back derives from the same problem in Manchester. read the thread it might give you some ideas

https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.pep...uZN7BrThSUnoENA
No Way
QUOTE (Hippocrates @ Fri, 8 Jul 2016 - 23:00) *
I see no bus lane signage. The Traffic Penalty Tribunal may have any operational TRO/Traffic Regulation Order for this alleged location.


I've now been told that it doesn't need bus lane signage, because it has "no motor vehicles" signage.
PASTMYBEST
QUOTE (No Way @ Sat, 9 Jul 2016 - 10:45) *
QUOTE (Hippocrates @ Fri, 8 Jul 2016 - 23:00) *
I see no bus lane signage. The Traffic Penalty Tribunal may have any operational TRO/Traffic Regulation Order for this alleged location.


I've now been told that it doesn't need bus lane signage, because it has "no motor vehicles" signage.


well that bit's almost right, the signs in place are authorised by the TSRGD to be used for bus lanes, but is it a bus lane? if not the council cannot enforce
No Way
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Sat, 9 Jul 2016 - 12:25) *
QUOTE (No Way @ Sat, 9 Jul 2016 - 10:45) *
QUOTE (Hippocrates @ Fri, 8 Jul 2016 - 23:00) *
I see no bus lane signage. The Traffic Penalty Tribunal may have any operational TRO/Traffic Regulation Order for this alleged location.


I've now been told that it doesn't need bus lane signage, because it has "no motor vehicles" signage.


well that bit's almost right, the signs in place are authorised by the TSRGD to be used for bus lanes, but is it a bus lane? if not the council cannot enforce


I've been trying to find out if this is a bus lane but with no luck. Should I contest on the grounds that it isn't a bus lane and hope it isn't? I've been told that if you try to contest but fail, they will still offer you the lower amount of fine. That right? Thanks.
PASTMYBEST
QUOTE (No Way @ Mon, 11 Jul 2016 - 14:57) *
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Sat, 9 Jul 2016 - 12:25) *
QUOTE (No Way @ Sat, 9 Jul 2016 - 10:45) *
QUOTE (Hippocrates @ Fri, 8 Jul 2016 - 23:00) *
I see no bus lane signage. The Traffic Penalty Tribunal may have any operational TRO/Traffic Regulation Order for this alleged location.


I've now been told that it doesn't need bus lane signage, because it has "no motor vehicles" signage.


well that bit's almost right, the signs in place are authorised by the TSRGD to be used for bus lanes, but is it a bus lane? if not the council cannot enforce


I've been trying to find out if this is a bus lane but with no luck. Should I contest on the grounds that it isn't a bus lane and hope it isn't? I've been told that if you try to contest but fail, they will still offer you the lower amount of fine. That right? Thanks.



They do not have to but many councils do, It may say on the PCN or council website if not ask them
No Way
I'm going to steam ahead and attempt to fight this on the grounds that this wasn't a "bus lane contravention". Could someone please word this for me? (A side note: on section 3 of their form it says "Enquiries: 0161 234 5006", but when you ring it, it only caters for making payments not "enquiries".)
PASTMYBEST
QUOTE (No Way @ Wed, 13 Jul 2016 - 09:52) *
I'm going to steam ahead and attempt to fight this on the grounds that this wasn't a "bus lane contravention". Could someone please word this for me? (A side note: on section 3 of their form it says "Enquiries: 0161 234 5006", but when you ring it, it only caters for making payments not "enquiries".)


If you are going to appeal, get the video , and have a look round the area, what advance warning signs are present?
No Way
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Wed, 13 Jul 2016 - 11:17) *
QUOTE (No Way @ Wed, 13 Jul 2016 - 09:52) *
I'm going to steam ahead and attempt to fight this on the grounds that this wasn't a "bus lane contravention". Could someone please word this for me? (A side note: on section 3 of their form it says "Enquiries: 0161 234 5006", but when you ring it, it only caters for making payments not "enquiries".)


If you are going to appeal, get the video , and have a look round the area, what advance warning signs are present?


Apparently I have to write to them for the video, but I only have until this Friday to make my case (their letter arrived late to me because it was posted in the wrong house) so I won't have time to get it. I tried their so-called "enquiry" line, only to find that that isn't what it is.

This quote here is from a driving instructor who drove that way not long before me: "It's not specifically a bus lane, but the whole road from that point is restricted to buses, taxis and cyclists. That's what the red circle signs are on either side. Just before that there is a blue and white arrow sign saying you MUST turn right, in between Yates's pub and the Portland Thistle hotel (unless you're a bus or a taxi)." The hotel he is speaking of is the building with the scaffolding to my right (on the council picture), and apparently I should have turned where you see "turn right" at the bottom of the picture. Although I have been unable to find this sign on Google earth/maps (view hidden by traffic), I have uploaded the attached picture. It shows the Portland Thistle hotel more or less in the middle of the picture. I'm not sure if this is a recent shot, but there is a bus lane on the left. Anyway, if we take his word as gospel, where I end up isn't specifically a bus lane, so, in the absence of the video, I just want to 'hit and hope' and say something to that effect.
PASTMYBEST
Have a read

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/2031...05035C.pdf.html
No Way
Thanks. Idiot here was looking at the wrong date on the PCN, I have more time yet. Hence I have written to the council asking for footage. Do they send a letter with an online link?
Project54
I know I'm late to this thread but had to reply because I recognised where this was the second I saw the picture. It has all changed recently so when I was last down there I was paying more attention to it than I otherwise would.

To be honest when I was driving down there it was pretty clear to me that general traffic wasn't allowed to drive through so I turned off as they intended and obviously didn't get a ticket. However on seeing this thread I've realised that while I think it's pretty clear your not supposed to drive down there, everything after that isn't quite so clear.

It's surprising when you actually start looking into something how little you actually remember of the specifics of a place you think you're familiar with so I have used streetview to check my experience of driving through there. The streetview round there is bit of mismatch between older out of date images and new stuff depending on where you click, it seems nobody in this thread has managed to find the newer stuff (both of the streetview links are to the out of date layout). The following links are with the new layout.

So lets start further back on Portland Street:
https://goo.gl/maps/zaeVQeZoTf62

Everything seems pretty straight forward here. The lane to the left is obviously a bus lane - painted on the road, signs at the side, no argument. General traffic is permitted, but obviously has to keep to the right lane

Further up as we get to the next set of lights:
https://goo.gl/maps/CCtfBdkRNso

Still straightforward. Left is still a bus lane, painted on the road, signs at the side. General traffic still permitted in the right lane

Up to the next set of lights:
https://goo.gl/maps/9VjGqzDtwP72

And thing start to get a little more complicated, turn right painted on the road.

As we go through the lights:
https://goo.gl/maps/bAMkqH3TJQ72

And it's clear here the left lane is still a bus lane, sign says so, so obviously traffic is forced to turn right (and this is where I've turned before)
And either side of the bus lane is a 'No Motor Vehicles' sign with a 'Except buses, taxis and for ACCESS' exception plate.
So does this mean vehicles requiring access can drive in the bus lane here? Not relevant to this ticket but rather confusing I think.

Lets go up to the next set of lights:
https://goo.gl/maps/jMsnBCa3CRR2

And the crucial thing here is that general traffic is permitted on the road that joins from the left (New York Street) and can turn left. So that bit of the road cannot be, and is not intended to be a bus lane. The intention is that general traffic has to turn immediate right. This all matches the intent from the video that was published prior to the works:

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/new...ows-how-8722110

HOWEVER the bit of red tarmac to the left isn't painted as bus lane, nothing on the road, no signage referring to it being a bus lane, just another set of 'No Motor Vehicle' signs with the and exception plate that says 'Except buses, taxis and for LOADING. This is the closest I can get on up to date pictures:

https://goo.gl/maps/ARb4EKiBRuq

As we head further up the right hand 'fork' definitely doesn't appear to be a bus lane (otherwise which lane would vehicles using it for loading use?) but interesting neither really is the left hand fork, however should a vehicle use that they then face the dilemma of being funnelled into the bus station which has 'No Entry' signs with a 'Except buses' exception plate and having to cross solid hatching to get into the right hand lane, see

https://goo.gl/maps/2JobAdMgxyC2
and
https://goo.gl/maps/9J7jqUAaB5R2

Only once we get further up past the tram lines to we get a 'proper' bus lane along with signs:

https://goo.gl/maps/qiMXpwfvGZo
https://goo.gl/maps/qaMRJMUPUyJ2

But once again there is a separate right fork presumably for traffic using it for loading.


-----------

So sorry for the long post, but essentially it's a long way of saying I believe this ticket for a bus lane at that point is total tosh. The OP can have done any number of things 'wrong', but not actually a bus lane offence at that location.

If the OP had driven straight up portland street, he has has to pass the earlier set of 'access only' type signs and driven in a bus lane briefly (in which I don't get how the access only signs are supposed to work!), however the photo at the location of the alleged offence doesn't prove this, as he could have joined legally from New York Street

If the OP has turned onto Portland Street from New York Street then at that point he's done nothing wrong. General traffic is then supposed to turn right. But there is no indication it is a bus lane simply that straight on is only permitted by general vehicles for loading. If he continues and is not loading then obviously he has committed an offence there, but not a bus lane one!

Interestingly the OP pulled into the layby here (there is no indication it is only for taxis).
https://goo.gl/maps/LTB84vUAm2q
Not relevant but had he exited via the end (which I don't think he did) then technically he would never passed through the loading only signs so they can't apply to him?

So the entirety of the council's case appears to be that immediately after those signs he looked to be taking the left fork. But I don't see that at at all relevant for a 'bus lane ticket' or that a bus lane ticket can even be issued here. If he actually took the right hand lane the worst he did was cross the solid white line bordering the cycle lane in changing lanes at the last minute. However even if he took the left lane, there is no indication it is a bus lane, but would then face the dilemma of turning into the bus station past no entry signs or crossing solid hatchings back to the right lane. But he has not been sent a ticket for either of these offences. At that point in the road there isn't a bus lane, so how the council can think they can issue a bus lane ticket whatever he did at that point is absurd.

In short the OP has probably breached the 'loading' only restriction but that's not the ticket he had been sent. I see no bus lane offence here because there is no signed and marked bus lane - if that bit is intended to be a bus lane it isn't signed. In fact I don't know why they didn't make the left fork a proper bus lane because it only leads to the bus station, but they didn't!

Edit: I've realised on re-reading that the 'left fork' idea was raised by the OP rather than this being the actual reason he was issued a ticket. In reality it seems he has received a ticket for entering the restricted section of road - but the road is not a bus lane so they shouldn't be issuing bus lane tickets! Can the council enforce the actual restrictions or is that the police? Might explain why they are misusing bus lane tickets. The simple defence is he didn't drive down a bus lane. Now if they want to enforce that he wasn't loading so shouldn't have driven down there, well that's a completely different matter. Had he been loading though it would be entirely legitimate to drive down there - and I don't know how they can possibly know if that was the case from the evidence they have provided (not that is matters, that is not the ticket they issued!).

I'm almost tempted to arrange to be collecting something from the section of road, so I can drive down there and stop to load, just to see if they still try and issue a bus lane ticket.
No Way
COUNCIL REPLY HERE

(Sorry I haven’t been on here for a while, I have been moving house. - purely out of interest, what happens to those who move house and hope the council can no longer find them? Also, thanks Project54...I am myself tempted to load.)

My argument to the Council...

Firstly, I have twice attempted to acquire video footage of this. The attached shows a Post office "first class signed" receipt delivered to the enquiry address you give on your representations letter and signed by someone called "Wilde" nine days ago. No response materialised. I believe that the alleged contravention should be quashed on this failure to provide information alone. In an effort to speak to someone about this, I rang the number given in the same section on your representations letter which says "Enquiries 0161 234 5006". This, however, is NOT for enquiries. It is for payments only, and I believe again that this false information is enough to quash the alleged contravention. I also believe that I wasn't in a bus lane. The sign/s I apparently passed say that where I was is "restricted to taxis, cycles and buses". There is nothing that states it is a "bus lane".

Council’s response here...

“I have decided not to cancel this Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). The council does not accept that any of the statutory grounds (listed below) or other grounds for representation have been established.

This Penalty Charge Notice was issued as the above vehicle (“the vehicle”) was in a restricted area during the hours of operation of the restricted area.

The vehicle was recorded by CCTV in a restricted area on Portland Street (North-East Bound). This restricted area is in operation 24 hours a day, 7 days a week; the only vehicles permitted to be in the restricted area are buses, taxis and for loading. The vehicle in respect of which this Penalty Charge Notice was issued is not within the permitted classes, nor was loading observed.

In your representation you stated that you believe that you wasn’t in a bus lane and there is nothing that states it is a “bus lane. However, as you enter the restricted area there are signs and road markings to indicate the start of the restricted area and an alternative route should have been taken. I have attached map of the location highlighting the start and end of the restricted area [the then goes into a lengthy passage about how Manchester council have invested £1 billion into the infrastructure and how many jobs that created].”
PASTMYBEST
post the actual, letter please not a transcript. Funny they keep referring to the restricted area, and not the bus lane. Although the can use CCTV for bus lanes
but cannot enforce other restrictions such as no motor vehicles
No Way
Here:

https://i.imgsafe.org/a2c7935221.jpg
PASTMYBEST
QUOTE (No Way @ Tue, 9 Aug 2016 - 20:19) *


There has to be a lot more than that, there is a lot of regulatory info missing
Churchmouse
Is the issue whether the OP can be prosecuted/fined by the council if there is a discrepancy between the offence stated on the penalty charge notice (driving in a bus lane) and the offence they now appear to be going with (driving into a restricted area)? In other words, if they charge "bus lane" are they required to prove "bus lane"?

--Churchmouse
PASTMYBEST
QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Tue, 9 Aug 2016 - 22:12) *
Is the issue whether the OP can be prosecuted/fined by the council if there is a discrepancy between the offence stated on the penalty charge notice (driving in a bus lane) and the offence they now appear to be going with (driving into a restricted area)? In other words, if they charge "bus lane" are they required to prove "bus lane"?

--Churchmouse


That's one avenue to be looked at. to enforce a bus lane, it needs be clear it is a bus lane, that the rejection keeps referring to restricted area, lends itself to it not being
a bus lane at that point.

Only the police can enforce an offence against the no motor vehicles
No Way
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Tue, 9 Aug 2016 - 21:26) *
QUOTE (No Way @ Tue, 9 Aug 2016 - 20:19) *


There has to be a lot more than that, there is a lot of regulatory info missing


Full letter here:

https://i.imgsafe.org/c73681c1fb.jpg

https://i.imgsafe.org/c73f6ec7f6.jpg

https://i.imgsafe.org/c29be287eb.jpg

https://i.imgsafe.org/c2a5f4b162.jpg

https://i.imgsafe.org/c2abf4c30f.jpg

Thanks everyone.


QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Tue, 9 Aug 2016 - 22:37) *
QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Tue, 9 Aug 2016 - 22:12) *
Is the issue whether the OP can be prosecuted/fined by the council if there is a discrepancy between the offence stated on the penalty charge notice (driving in a bus lane) and the offence they now appear to be going with (driving into a restricted area)? In other words, if they charge "bus lane" are they required to prove "bus lane"?

--Churchmouse


That's one avenue to be looked at. to enforce a bus lane, it needs be clear it is a bus lane, that the rejection keeps referring to restricted area, lends itself to it not being
a bus lane at that point.

Only the police can enforce an offence against the no motor vehicles


I'm also wondering if, technically speaking, the Council are supposed to respond to ALL my points? I said that I felt the ticket should be cancelled not just because this wasn't a "bus lane" but also because the "enquiry" telephone line on their form was not actually an enquiry line (and so I couldn't ring anyone to find out where to view the moving footage). They didn't respond to this at all.
Safedriver67
I know Portland Street and I can tell you that those signs are relatively new. If you look at the Google Streetview images for Portland Street as you move the cursor they are made up of some images from April 2016 and some from June 2015. The June 2015 images show that the signs aren't there and must have been fitted due to a change to the road layout.

If you approach Portland Street from New York Street it's very easy to miss them and I'm sure the Council must be making lots of money from people who aren't aware of the changes - especially those who have been occasionally driving down that street quite legally and have been caught out.

Very sneaky of them in my opinion. Does anyone know if they have a duty to display signage to warn motorists of the changes?

I have attached a copy of the photo
No Way
VICTORY!!!!

Email from Tribunal...

"The authority has decided not to contest your appeal. You can see the reasons why in your online case file."

Case file...

"In light of the new information provided, ie that the appellant entered the restricted area for the purposes of loading within the restricted area, the Council no longer wish to contest this case."

Thanks everyone!
PASTMYBEST
QUOTE (No Way @ Fri, 9 Sep 2016 - 15:42) *
VICTORY!!!!

Email from Tribunal...

"The authority has decided not to contest your appeal. You can see the reasons why in your online case file."

Case file...

"In light of the new information provided, ie that the appellant entered the restricted area for the purposes of loading within the restricted area, the Council no longer wish to contest this case."

Thanks everyone!


Well done can we see your appeal to the adjudicator, that put them off
No Way
I am accused of a “bus lane contravention”. Although I was in a restricted area, this is not specifically a “bus lane”. To enforce a “bus lane” it needs to be clear it is a “bus lane”. The fact that the Council’s rejection of my appeal several times refers to “restricted area” only lends itself to its not being a “bus lane”...

“you stated that you believe that you wasn’t [sic] in a bus lane and there is nothing that states it is a “bus lane”. However, as you enter the restricted area there are signs and road markings to indicate the start of the restricted area and an alternative route should have been taken. I have attached map of the location highlighting the start and end of the restricted area...”

As I pointed out in my appeal to the Council, their PCN provides false information, in the form of their enquiry line. The below is taken from my initial representatione Council.

1. Firstly, I have twice attempted to acquire video footage of this. The attached shows a Post office "first class signed" receipt delivered to the address given on your form in the box that says "Please send....application to view footage". The date on the receipt is 14th July and as you can see from the attached picture, Royal Mail's tracker shows that someone called "Wilde" signed for it on the 18th July. I have waited nine days and nothing has materialised. I believe that the alleged contravention should be quashed on this failure to provide information alone.
2. In an effort to speak to someone about this, I rang the number given in the same section which says "Enquiries 0161 234 5006". This, however, is NOT for enquiries. It is for payments only, and I believe again that this false information is enough to quash the alleged contravention.

Their subsequent Notice of Rejection makes no mention whatsoever of the “Enquiries 0161 234 5006” falsehood query (although does include several irrelevant political lines about how the Council has spent £1 billion on infrastructure and how they will “support its continuing growth and success”, ...but nothing about the false enquiry line), and I still contend that any document that has misinformation should be quashed. And doubly so if they can’t be bothered to respond in their NoR.

3. Please note that the Council’s Notice of rejection also mentions that the “restricted area” (not bus lane) allows for any vehicle to load or unload.

“the only vehicles permitted to be in the restricted area are buses, taxis and for loading. The vehicle in respect of which this Penalty Charge Notice was issued is not within the permitted classes, nor was loading observed.”

My being in that zone actually WAS in order to unload. I had to drop off a large package at a place called Missoula, which is a little further to the right of where you see me. I don’t know the area well and my eye line was obstructed by the buses which you can see in the photograph,

[The Council's picture of my car went here]

so I aborted stopping and carried on the road looking to my right. If you view footage a couple of minutes later you will see my car having doubled back, pull over and offload.
PASTMYBEST
QUOTE (No Way @ Sat, 10 Sep 2016 - 22:42) *
I am accused of a “bus lane contravention”. Although I was in a restricted area, this is not specifically a “bus lane”. To enforce a “bus lane” it needs to be clear it is a “bus lane”. The fact that the Council’s rejection of my appeal several times refers to “restricted area” only lends itself to its not being a “bus lane”...

“you stated that you believe that you wasn’t [sic] in a bus lane and there is nothing that states it is a “bus lane”. However, as you enter the restricted area there are signs and road markings to indicate the start of the restricted area and an alternative route should have been taken. I have attached map of the location highlighting the start and end of the restricted area...”

As I pointed out in my appeal to the Council, their PCN provides false information, in the form of their enquiry line. The below is taken from my initial representatione Council.

1. Firstly, I have twice attempted to acquire video footage of this. The attached shows a Post office "first class signed" receipt delivered to the address given on your form in the box that says "Please send....application to view footage". The date on the receipt is 14th July and as you can see from the attached picture, Royal Mail's tracker shows that someone called "Wilde" signed for it on the 18th July. I have waited nine days and nothing has materialised. I believe that the alleged contravention should be quashed on this failure to provide information alone.
2. In an effort to speak to someone about this, I rang the number given in the same section which says "Enquiries 0161 234 5006". This, however, is NOT for enquiries. It is for payments only, and I believe again that this false information is enough to quash the alleged contravention.

Their subsequent Notice of Rejection makes no mention whatsoever of the “Enquiries 0161 234 5006” falsehood query (although does include several irrelevant political lines about how the Council has spent £1 billion on infrastructure and how they will “support its continuing growth and success”, ...but nothing about the false enquiry line), and I still contend that any document that has misinformation should be quashed. And doubly so if they can’t be bothered to respond in their NoR.

3. Please note that the Council’s Notice of rejection also mentions that the “restricted area” (not bus lane) allows for any vehicle to load or unload.

“the only vehicles permitted to be in the restricted area are buses, taxis and for loading. The vehicle in respect of which this Penalty Charge Notice was issued is not within the permitted classes, nor was loading observed.”

My being in that zone actually WAS in order to unload. I had to drop off a large package at a place called Missoula, which is a little further to the right of where you see me. I don’t know the area well and my eye line was obstructed by the buses which you can see in the photograph,

[The Council's picture of my car went here]

so I aborted stopping and carried on the road looking to my right. If you view footage a couple of minutes later you will see my car having doubled back, pull over and offload.


Good man, you gave them the out and they took it, wish you'd mentioned the loading earlier though
No Way
I didn't mention the loading because I didn't conjure it up until the last minute and banked on their not checking the footage, if you get my drift. All's fair in love and war.
PASTMYBEST
QUOTE (No Way @ Mon, 12 Sep 2016 - 08:21) *
I didn't mention the loading because I didn't conjure it up until the last minute and banked on their not checking the footage, if you get my drift. All's fair in love and war.


That's your decision, if you had we would have warned you that the penalty is a fine of up to 5k
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2019 Invision Power Services, Inc.