Hello everyone and Merry Christmas,

I have appealed to PCN on grounds that one of the bus lane signs located after the T-Junction of Bloomsbury Place and Southampton Row being positioned face to the road and being obstructed by a scaffolding. I have also enclosed with my letter all the photos I took of the sign and the scaffolding at that time. I thought this would do as I read somewhere that after any junction there should be a 'repeating' sign and hoped this would be enough, but it looks I was very, very wrong

They have also assisted their reply with some photos of theirs, one or two of them are even completely irrelevant as they cover the section of the street I wouldn't even see at the time of alleged contravention. Anything to make sure it looks the signage is 'repeated sufficiently frequently'. They even took photos of some of the signs twice from different perspectives.

Link to the location:
Google Map Link

As you can see in the Google Street View, I would be in the position sort of behind the white van (the one on the right with the word 'insafe') so in order to avoid being stopped in the yellow junction I moved to the left, but then there was no chance to change the lane to leave the bus lane so I carried on for a couple of metres... only to be caught by the camera. To add even more to the pain all of it happened just 5 minutes before 7pm when the time of operation of the bus lane finishes.


My questions are:
1. Is there any time limit for their reply to my appeal?
2. Is it acceptable for the signs to be obstructed and twisted?
3. What do I do now? Help!

post up your pics

and their pics

use tinypic as per the faq
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?autoco...ticle&id=16

Unfortunately, there is no time limit for their response to an informal appeal. If the signs are as bad as you say they are, there would be some mileage in this argument.

I'm sorry I didn't put all the details in the first place but I didn't have all the documents with me at that time.
I'll scan PCN and my letter to them and all my photos and theirs. Thank you for taking time especially now during Christmas

Ok, I have all the documents now ready:

Uploading them and posting in chronological order.

This is the PCN


This is my appeal letter:


My photos:


Their response:


Their photos:

Location MAP (I made myself)
Numbers are the location of Council Photos
No7 is the location of the sign in question.

Is it a lost case than?

Depends on how many signs you passed which were correctly positioned. What is your opinion?

there is another case on here dealing with exactly the same issue.

the last visable sign is located just south of russell square which makes the bus lane unsigned from bloomsbury place to theobalds road, approx 1/4.
IMO what makes it more confusing is there is a huge gap in the bus lane due to a pedestrian crossing and box junction opposite bloomsbury place, the repeater sign that is twisted is vital to inform a motorist of the times of operation of the continuation of the bus lane.

also the pictures scamden have supplied are old and look nothing like its current condition.



edit - pelican crossing is a pedestrian crossing

Thanks fuel_2001. In that case, I would say there is some mileage, particularly re your last point. Two of the following cases deal with this sort of issue (2100116712 and 2100129623): http://davidmarq.com/uploaderv6_1/files/7/...e%20appeals.pdf

That's how I feel, the big gap between 'Park Inn' and Theobald's Rd which is caused by the yellow box junction. Even before yellow box junction there is a huge 'black gap' just nothing, no road markings nothing to alert the driver of the oncoming bus lane after the pedestrian crossing.
Do you think I should make a formal appeal than? The rejection letter says I am eligible for a 50% discount only for 2 weeks from the date of this letter. This is just mad did they wait till Christmas to send this letter knowing how long it takes for the letters to arrive?! I only got it on Friday which means it took a week for it to arrive.

I made a location map posted above there is one sign before the start, one when the bus lane starts and one just before 'Park Inn' hotel. I entered the bus lane in the area where the sign in question is. (point No 7 on my map)

Personally, I would put in another appeal (informal) with all your points re the signage. You are aware that the penalty is double by the time you put in a formal appeal. In order to satisfy an adjudicator, any video evidence would have to show your vehicle passing through proper signs so you need to ask yourself that basic question.

I have seen the video footage, it caught my car on the stretch of road starting well after sign in question (which I marked no7) and Theobald's Rd. So the last 'proper' sign would be the one marked as no 5 in my map.

Is it possible to put in another informal appeal then?

Yes it is; but, the Council do not have to consider it since the legislation re bus lanes is somewhat silent in this regard. In fact, some councils do not even consider informal appeals, at all. If they do reject it, and it goes further as you may, most probably, repeat it at the formal stage (on receipt of the Enforcement Notice), and eventually proves successful at PATAS, the Council will have a problem re costs.

See this link from PATAS: http://www.parkingandtrafficappeals.gov.uk...enforcement.htm

I am worried a bit now, it is their opinion against mine.
If you look at photos D & F it is clearly visible the sign is twisted and it had to be this way for a while as one of the scaffolding poles behind is forcing it into this weird position. In my opinion it is very important one as without any road markings this is the only sign alerting drivers to the bus lane and hours of its operation.
However in their reply they claim that the signage is repeated sufficiently frequently enough.

There are three signs before the traffic lights one just before the place where the bus lane starts next one directly where it starts, and one in front of 'Cafe Nero' which is roughly 170-180ft before the traffic lights. Then there is a gap without any road markings between the traffic light and yellow box junction of around 43ft, the yellow box junction itself is around 46ft followed by the pedestrian crossing. Directly after pedestrian crossing red coloured bus lane appears again. This also is the point where the sign in question is situated.

The issue re video evidence is simple: does it show your vehicle passing through warning signs re the bus lane?

If yes, I would pay; if no, I would contest.

video evidence doesn't even reach as far as the mentioned scaffolding due to the curvature of the road.
\Thanks for all your help and support

I received a Notice of Rejection of Representation against Enforcement Notice in a very similar case.

I need your help guys on this as now I am preparing an Appeal to PATAS.

Here's the contents of my Representation sent to the Council:

Dear Sir/Madam,

RE: PCN Number
In reply to your letter of XXth December 2010, I wish to make a formal appeal in response to your decision to enforce the penalty charge despite the facts of the case.
At the junction of Southampton Row and Bloomsbury Place there is a gap of around 35 metres without any road markings apart from a yellow box junction. The only sign alerting any driver of the location of a bus lane is the 961 sign located approximately 2 metres after the pedestrian crossing located at the end of this junction. On the day of the alleged contravention this vital sign was not only obstructed by scaffolding but also twisted by approximately 90 degrees and parallel to the carriageway and is therefore a non-compliant marking. The sign which is twisted is vital to inform a motorist of the times of operation and the continuation of the bus lane; especially seeing as there is a huge gap in the bus lane due to a pedestrian crossing and box junction opposite Bloomsbury Place. The sudden termination of the bus lane before a large junction with an unusual layout and the lack of a diagonal lead-in section of line combined with the non-visible signage can be quite confusing to motorists; as it proved to me on the day in question. Also, the on-road markings for the bus lane are approximately 60 metres from the end of the said junction and therefore would not have alerted me to the bus lane beforehand. Within seconds of seeing the on-road markings I attempted to exit the bus lane but due to the heavy traffic I was unable to do so.
You state in your letter of XXth December 2010 that 'I am, however, satisfied that signage is repeated sufficiently frequently to alert drivers to the bus lane and it's hours of operation.', however, according to the Traffic Signs Manual, 'The sign to diagram 959 should be used in conjunction with the road marking 'BUS LANE'. The sign should appear at the commencement of the Bus Lane and at intervals not exceeding 300 metres along uninterrupted lengths of the lane. It is also used after each junction that the Bus Lane breaks for.' I would also like to point out that the council have provided no evidence as proof that I passed any such signage beforehand and should not base their decision on pure assumptions. The above mentioned facts made the whole of this section of the bus lane unsigned as clearly seen in the video evidence held by Camden Council and photographs sent in my previous correspondence of XXrd October 2010 and is thus unenforceable.
In your letter of XXth December 2010 Camden Council sent photographs as evidence of satisfying the frequency of their signs. I cannot accept those photographs as evidence simply because they are clearly out of date and they do not represent the current state of the signs. Moreover, Camden Council uses as evidence of the correct signage a photograph of the disputed sign which at the time of the council's photograph has no scaffolding erected around it and is in a completely different position than it was on the date and since the alleged offence. Furthermore, some of the photographs used by council's representative include two signs which are located after the junction of Southampton Row with Theobald's Road which makes them totally irrelevant to this case as the signs are positioned much further down the road; in fact 150 metres and 240 metres from the area of the alleged contravention.

I contacted Camden Council's PCN Processing Centre to enquire about the outdated photographs and spoke to a representative by the name of Hanna who informed me that they do not always send someone out to investigate and take current photographs and confirmed that the photographs which were sent to me were ones from their archives. In a situation where I am being held liable to pay Camden Council £120.00 for a PCN which I am disputing, I find this course of action wholly unacceptable and disturbing; specifically as the basis of my appeal is founded on circumstances wholly pertinent to the time of the alleged offence.
I consequently do not accept any responsibilities and reject the basis on which this PCN was issued and your subsequent decision to enforce the said PCN.
On this occasion I would wish to execute my rights given me by the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Please receive my formal request for the following information to be communicated to me in writing.
I formally request a copy of the logs of maintenance visits verifying existence and condition
of the sign in question for the year 2010.
I trust that this information will be forwarded to me without delay.
I have been closely monitoring this area and the bus lane directly located in front of the building at 84 Southampton Row. The requested data is vital to establish certain relevant facts about the 961 bus lane sign located in front of Hason Raja Indian and Bangladeshi Restaurant should it be required. It has been over 3 months since I brought the existing problem with the sign to the attention of Camden Council and even though the scaffolding has now been removed the problem with this sign has still not been rectified as of the date of this letter. Further investigation has also brought to light that Camden Council have been aware of the non-compliant positioning of this sign from other similar cases in 2010, and going back to at least March 2009, and do not appear to have made any attempt to rectify the situation and/or put in place prevention methods to avoid the frequent recurrence of said situation regarding this sign. I believe that this could be construed as negligence on their part considering the number of cases which I have come across involving this particular sign and bus lane.
I await your response and trust you will find that the above stated facts render the issued PCN unenforceable under the circumstances.

Yours sincerely,


And here's their response:



What really irritates me the most is this very statement:

I should however explain here, that we take the view that the signage in question, is fully compliant with the requirements of road traffic legislation. Therefore, I believe it is reasonable to have expected you to have taken note of it on this occasion.

Does anyone think I should appeal to PATAS - this is the photo of the sign in question

fergee has just won on a twisted sign, last Friday, Camrose Ave. thread, Harrow.

The usual threat about will send a C.C,: wrong in law, should be may.

"within the next 28 days". Bingo!
-"Within"
-28 days from when?

Muppets.

And so good they said it twice

@Mark
Yes you appeal to PATAS.
Apart from unclear signage they have just self destructed in the NOR by not citing prescribed timing periods correctly. They provide no certainty to the deadlines for either payment or appeal.

http://www.davidmarq.com/bama/Melnikova_v_...ithin56days.pdf

Hi guys,
I need some more help with the appeal to PATAS.
Are there any templates or would anyone of you would agree to write a couple of line I definitely need to use, or maybe it is enough to edit my previous letters, what do you think?

I also have one more question. I have read that it is better to opt for a hearing than a postal decision.
However I am away on holiday for a month so it won't be possible for me to attend a hearing till the end of March.
I thought I'll send my appeal as late as possible but it all depends on the waiting time for a hearing. Do you think I should mention the fact of me being away in my appeal to PATAS?

Advice: 1. Tick box "contravention did not occur" 2. In large box underneath write "unclear signage and invalid documents, full and further details to follow and/or as advised" 3. Get it in now and go for a personal hearing. 4. Tell them when you are unavailable. Take copies and post it recorded, and get a receipt. Do not delay till last minute.

There are no templates - well, there are - but it is best to write your own because each case is always different and it helps you understand the issues better. You need to go through the advice given, itemise everything and start from there.

So, as well as the previous case I cited, there is this one re Harrow about signs:

http://davidmarq.com/uploaderv6_1/files/7/...s%20Gate%29.pdf

Also, there is the other one of a few Fridays ago, same location, but with the twisted sign. Will post up when received.

PATAS: should be an in and out job - 2 issues - and then a coffee at Pret a Manger cross the road!

***************************************************

Here is the sign in Harrow location, though different thread:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showto...rt=#entry524202

Sorry, their evidence has to show what signage is in place on the day, as well. Your evidence will show the twisted sign.

And they do not include (b):

Adjudication by traffic adjudicator

6(1)Where a council serve a notice of rejection, the person who made the representations under paragraph 2 above in respect of which that notice was served may, before—

(a)the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of service of that notice; or

(b)such longer period as a traffic adjudicator may allow,

appeal to a traffic adjudicator against the council’s decision.


And they threaten a Charge Certificate:

Rejection of representations against enforcement notice

5Where any representations are made under paragraph 2 above but the council concerned do not accept that a ground has been established, the notice served under sub-paragraph (10) of the said paragraph 2 (in this Schedule referred to as “the notice of rejection”) must—

(a)state that a charge certificate may be served under paragraph 8 below unless before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of service of the notice of rejection—

(i)the penalty charge is paid; or

(ii)the person on whom the notice is served appeals to a traffic adjudicator against the penalty charge; and

(b)describe in general terms the form and manner in which such an appeal must be made;

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/1996/9/schedule/1/enacted

Hello again,

I guess this is the final stage of my appeal. I have a hearing at PATAS next week.
I have attached 'Case Summery' sent in by Camden to PATAS below.
I would be interested if you have any opinion as I am in process of making notes for the hearing.
I would really appreciate your input guys.

did they send you a copy of the DVD in their evidence pack ?

I mentioned this in another thread but i cant find it.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/tss/tsmanu...ualchapter5.pdf - page 102 (17.8)

The lines (diagram 1010) at the end of the bus lane on the lead to junction with Theobolds Road should start 30 metres prior to the junction. You might want to get your tape measure out as you'll be lucky if they actually commence 10 metres prior to the junction.

They also advise a 1050 diagram, where is it?

This might actually help to stop the junction being used to boost revenue, Its such an income generator for the EA.

yes they did

Is it obligatory to position ' END OF BUS LANE' sign at the end of the bus lane and what happens if the sign is missing?

you'd need to check it out but AFAIR that bus lane doent end there and continues down the Kingsway, however there should be an 'END OF BUS LANE' sign somewhere.

I know, they use this argument to their defense however there is another bus lane prior to the one I had driven into between Euston and Russel Square which operates from Mon to Fri with no 'END OF BUS LANE' sign. Hence my question I had asked before.

In other words according to them I haven't passed 'END OF BUS LANE' therefore I should have know it carries on. But I haven't passed any 'END OF BUS LANE' earlier either which would determine the end of the previous bus lane.

Where I am heading with this on it is to prove that the end of bus lane isn't always determined but the sign. (at least in Camden on the same street)
Not even mentioning the fact it changes from 5 day a week bus lane to six day a week bus lane.

Any thoughts?