Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Bus lane fine on Bank Holiday
FightBack Forums > Queries > Council Parking Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices
Purple15
Hi everyone,

I have just received two bus lane fines, a minute apart on the same bus lane on Barking Road, E6. I had assumed that bus lanes were okay to drive in on Easter Monday as this counted as a Sunday in my eyes. It seems as I was wrong. Is there any way I can appeal the fines, in relation to them being on a Bank Holiday, and being issued twice on the same bus lane, a minute apart?

Thanks in advance!
stamfordman
Post the PCNs - we've just had a faulty one from Barking Rd.

Put pics on https://imgbb.com or such like.
roythebus
London bus lanes apply on Bank holidays.
Neil B
QUOTE (roythebus @ Fri, 3 May 2019 - 00:32) *
London bus lanes apply on Bank holidays.

Indeed and a common mistake.

But if it's where I think Roy it's a sneaky one.
One minute between PCNs and the two bus lanes separated by an inexplicable stretch of
only about 10 metres.

We'll know if we get to see the docs.
Purple15
Here is the link with the photos.

https://ibb.co/album/dpW7wF

So you think there is no way I contest the Bank Holiday element of this? Other parking charges do not apply on Bank Holidays, e.g. parking in a permit control bay is free on Bank Holidays.

Thanks again for helping.
nextdoor
QUOTE
Other parking charges do not apply on Bank Holidays, e.g. parking in a permit control bay is free on Bank Holidays.


This is a moving traffic offence, not a parking contravention.
cp8759
QUOTE (Purple15 @ Sat, 4 May 2019 - 09:04) *
Here is the link with the photos.

https://ibb.co/album/dpW7wF

So you think there is no way I contest the Bank Holiday element of this? Other parking charges do not apply on Bank Holidays, e.g. parking in a permit control bay is free on Bank Holidays.

Thanks again for helping.

There is no "bank holiday element", the bus lane signs do not say "except on bank holidays" do they?

The only practical thing to do is to try and get the 2nd PCN cancelled on the basis that there was only one contravention.
rsg444
Are you able to suggest the wording for for stating the 2nd PCN should be cancelled please?
rsg444
I'm thinking something along the lines of:

I am writing to challenge the two PCNs that have been issued for the same alleged contravention. PCNs xxx and xxx issued 1 minute apart on the same day on the same stretch of road. As there is only one alleged contravention please may I request that the second PCN, xxxxx is duly cancelled?

In addition to this, I draw your attention to the following legislation that relates to PCNs issued using CCTV enforcement, in particular section 5, subsection C.

"8.—(1) Where an approved local authority have reason to believe that a penalty charge is payable under Part 2 with respect to a vehicle, they may, in accordance with paragraphs (2) and (5) below, serve a notice (“penalty charge notice”) on the person appearing to them to be the owner of the vehicle or on the person appearing to them to be the person liable to pay the charge.

(2) Subject to paragraph (3), a penalty charge notice shall be served before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the detection date.

(3) Where—

(a)within 14 days of the detection date an approved local authority have made a request to the Secretary of State for the supply of relevant particulars; and
(b)those particulars have not been supplied before the date after which the authority would not be entitled to serve a penalty charge notice by virtue of paragraph (2),
the authority shall continue to be entitled to serve a penalty charge notice for a further period of six months beginning with the date mentioned in sub-paragraph (b).

(4) In paragraph (3) “relevant particulars” means particulars relating to the identity of the keeper of the vehicle contained in the register of mechanically propelled vehicles maintained by the Secretary of State under the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994.

(5) A penalty charge notice must state—

(a)the registration mark of the vehicle involved in the alleged contravention;
(b)the detection date and the time at which the alleged contravention occurred;
©the reasons why the authority believe that a penalty charge is payable;"


5C states the reasons why the authority believe that a penalty charge is payable. On examining both PCNs, the reason has not been made clear. The reason is given as "Being in a bus lane" - however, to my understanding, it is not a contravention to be in a bus lane. I am of the understanding that a bus lane cannot be used during the hours of operation. You as the enforcing authority have made no attempt to state what the hours of operation are (if any) and therefore you have created ambiguity by issuing these two PCNs.

As a result, please can you duly cancel both PCNs?

Regards,
rsg444
Also another question - if the PCN has been issued with a spelling mistake to the name (i.e. it is not as shown on the V5C) is this enough reason to have the PCNs cancelled?
cp8759
QUOTE (rsg444 @ Wed, 8 May 2019 - 11:27) *
Are you able to suggest the wording for for stating the 2nd PCN should be cancelled please?

Who are you in relation to Purple15?
rsg444
Hi CP, I've seen your response on the other threat. Purple15 is a friend - I didn't realise she had already created this thread. It's prob worth closing the other thread down (if there's any admins reading this).

GSV is Of Exact location of camera that captured the vehicle.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Barking...#33;4d0.0381752

This is where the sign first appears.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Barking...#33;4d0.0381752

GSV of where the second PCN came from

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Barking...#33;4d0.0381752
rsg444
Anyone able to assist with my challenge - or it is more like a formal rep as it was sent via the post?

I've taken a look at the video footage and pictures, none of them show the vehicle passing the bus lane sign - is this good enough grounds?

14 days is up on Monday so ideally want to get the letter out today as Newham still use Post or Fax for their appeals.
cp8759
rsg444 ideally we need Purple15 to post on here himself/herself. You also need to stop referencing the wrong legislation, I gave you a link to the correct Act in the other thread.

Post a video and a link to the location on google street view. For the continuous contravention angle, these are useful references:

James George Gibson v London Borough of Haringey (case reference 2110189461) http://bit.ly/2IioR0q
Suki Ashley Fraser v London Borough of Barnet (case reference 2170557869) http://bit.ly/2GjRMiG
Neil B
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Fri, 10 May 2019 - 19:01) *
Post a link to the location on google street view.

Camera location links and first BL start point link are in post #12 and correct.

An interesting one missing is the point between cameras where the bus lane breaks for an
inexplicable 68m (to next taper) 90m to 2nd BL start.
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5337679,0.0...6384!8i8192

--
Also, for info.
The first bus lane is circa 320m with first camera @ 270m.
I find NO repeater signs on this 320m stretch on GSV.

Second bus lane is circ 500m, ending to accommodate major junctions.

Distance between cameras is circa 450m only. (tallies with one minute @ circa 18mph avg.)
Purple15
Hi,

Thanks for the advice. I appealed both fines on the grounds that multiple cameras were used to capture same offence (fines are within one minute of each other on the same stretch of road).
I also asked for video footage that captured my car going past a sign detailing the times of the bus lane.

Unfortunately both appeals have been rejected and the request for video footage completely ignored. I have attached the rejection letter - other than the PCN, the rejection letters were identical.
Can you please advise what to do next - should I pay the first fine (genuine mistake) and continue to appeal the second, or carry on appealing both? I'm not sure if I have any grounds for appeal as it does state in the rejection letter that the lanes are on different locations on Barking Road and the contravention is captured by two different cameras.

Many thanks.

Here is the link for the rejection letter: https://ibb.co/PrspdWz
cp8759
Show us what you sent, and the rest of the rejection letter.
Purple15
Here are the links:

https://ibb.co/mGfXMTk
https://ibb.co/Wnb2zdt

Thanks.
cp8759
They're talking absolute rubbish. I would wait for the enforcement notices.
Purple15
https://ibb.co/VWnS7MQ
https://ibb.co/Fs9PtXy

I've just received two enforcements letters for each of the PCNs. Links above shown front and back for one of them.

Can anyone advise on how to draft a reply please?

Many thanks.
cp8759
Send them the draft below, together with a copy of this http://bit.ly/2ZeRfVN

---------

Dear Sir or Madam,

I contest liability on the basis that the alleged contravention did not occur. I refer you to the decision in Mohammad Shah Alam v London Borough of Newham (2180143104, 30 June 2018) where the tribunal ruled as follows:

"Essentially, two different camera operators have caught the Appellant drive through the pedestrian zone when he ought not. That entry into the pedestrian zone is, in my view, the contravention.

In my judgment, the imposition of four additional penalties was excessive and unlawful. The most simple example from which I can draw is a bus lane. If a person chooses to drive in a bus lane when prohibited, the entry into the bus lane is the prohibited act, one cannot impose PCNs simply because different operators caught the driver in different locations along the bus lane.

If I return to the core principle of ne bis in idem, the imposition of multiple civil penalties is not, in my judgment, acceptable.

It follows that I will allow the appeal in respect of PN16858015, PN16858026, PN16858037, PN16858048.

The appeal in respect of the initial contravention PN16857985 is refused.
"

Due to the above, the second PCN must be cancelled.

In its informal representations response, you stated that two PCNs were issued because the vehicle was captured by different cameras along different sections of Barking Rroad, you seem to think it is acceptable to issue multiple PCNs in such circumstances. As has been made clear by the tribunal, this is not the correct position in law. The council is under a duty to apply the law as it is, not the law as the council would like it to be. The council's failure to apply the law correctly amounts to a failure to consider, in consequence of which the first PCN must also be cancelled.
Purple15
Hi,

I responded to the last rejection letters received using the draft provided by cp8759. I also added that I was unable to view the alleged contraventions as Newham website was down.

Newham Council have responded by sending me two more rejection letters, along with CDs of the footage. They have taken the fines back down to £65 each as I had said it was unfair to double the fines during a period in which the footage was unavailable.

Here is my appeal:
https://ibb.co/dt4NRM2
https://ibb.co/Bz1wpm2


And the letter received from Newham Council (2 identical letters with different PCNs):
https://ibb.co/F4PsZvx
https://ibb.co/pZbxWYG

Please advise on what to do next. Should I pay one fine as being in the bus lane on a bank holiday was a genuine mistake but clearly the council wont see it like that, or continue to contest both?
Presumably I send the same appeal letter, without the paragraph on providing evidence?

Many thanks.
cp8759
The council has not shown any real consideration of your representation, that in itself could win the case for you. There must be another page of the rejection letter, I know it might look like "standard" text but it's important that you show us.
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.