Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: First time ever caught in a Bus Lane; any advice?
FightBack Forums > Queries > Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices
paternoster
Hi all. My first post here, apologies if it is in the wrong place.

I have been caught driving in a Bus Lane.

This is a route through Reading Town Centre which my girlfriend and I have driven for years and which was only restricted to vehicles between 11.00 and 16.00. That was until 18/04/2011. On this date, there were changes made to roads and routes through Reading. Marshals were out to direct people trying to take their normal routes down alternative routes so that they would not drive in restricted areas and incur penalties. The marshals were situated in areas were changes had taken place, except on the street which I drove down. Looking at the Borough Council's website, this contained details of changes to the routes, but no mention was made of the street in question.

What must have happened is the sign on the street was changed so that, now, 11.00 to 16.00 are the only times when you can drive on the street and at other times it is a Bus Lane.

I received a Penalty Notice yesterday relating to 18/04/2011 which came as I complete shock. It was only on receipt of this that I realised that the street is now a Bus Lane at the times when I take my girlfriend to work and pick her up. This means that I can look forward to receiving a Penalty Notice for every morning and evening from 18/04/2011 until 04/05/2011. Sure enough, two Penalty Notices relating to 19/04/2011 arrived in today's post.

I have written to the Council and enclosed payment for the charge on 18/04/2011. I have pointed out that this was an honest and genuine mistake on my part, having driven this route for years. I have never driven in a Bus Lane before when I should not have and have drawn their attention to this, emphasising that if I had realised there were changes to the entry times on this route that I would never have entered it when I did. I have asked them to exercise discretion and show leniency by accepting the payment for 18/04/2011 and waiving any further Penalty Notices incurred up to 04/05/2011.

Does anyone have any suggestions in case the Council do not show leniency? I dare say some Cpuncils may be more willing than others to do so. I appreciate that ignorance is no excuse and if they choose to enforce each and every Penalty Notice they can do so; it will bring them in a fair sum!

Neil B
I fought a Reading BL a couple of years back. The paperwork was entensively flawed at the time. Hopefully no changes.

Show it ALL pls.
paternoster
QUOTE (Neil B @ Fri, 6 May 2011 - 14:12) *
I fought a Reading BL a couple of years back. The paperwork was entensively flawed at the time. Hopefully no changes.

Show it ALL pls.


Sorry, as I say I am new to the forum. What precisely do you want me to show and may I ask why? Not being obstinate, just curious.
Neil B
QUOTE (paternoster @ Fri, 6 May 2011 - 14:36) *
QUOTE (Neil B @ Fri, 6 May 2011 - 14:12) *
I fought a Reading BL a couple of years back. The paperwork was entensively flawed at the time. Hopefully no changes.

Show it ALL pls.


Sorry, as I say I am new to the forum. What precisely do you want me to show and may I ask why? Not being obstinate, just curious.


Everything you have received??

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=36858

(One complete PCN will do)
paternoster
QUOTE (Neil B @ Fri, 6 May 2011 - 14:44) *
Everything you have received??

(One complete PCN will do)


Thanks for taking the time to respond, Neil B. I appreciate it.

Again, can I emphasise that I am not being deliberately obstinate, but I am afraid I still do not follow as to why it is important to post a copy of a PCN. I am not disputing that it is my car that is in the photograph, or that I am driving it, or that it took place at the date and time they state. Apologies if this is not what you have in mind, but I wouldn't want to try to wriggle out of these Penalty Notices by arguing something technical based on images, etc.

If you let me know the parts of the Penalty Notice that are relevant I will happily type these.

I probably should have been clearer in my initial post when I asked for "any suggestions". I was thinking in terms of anyone successfully appealing that the cumulative amount of successive penalties is excessive, even though each one relates to a separate date and time, and that in light of an honest and genuine mistake (which will not now be repeated as I have learned that this is now a bus lane!) one penalty is enough? The Council has not lost anything financially by my infringements and as I can expect to receive up to 15 Penalty Notices I am hoping that the total amount in charges might be viewed as unreasonable.
Neil B
QUOTE (paternoster @ Fri, 6 May 2011 - 15:07) *
QUOTE (Neil B @ Fri, 6 May 2011 - 14:44) *
Everything you have received??

(One complete PCN will do)


Thanks for taking the time to respond, Neil B. I appreciate it.

Again, can I emphasise that I am not being deliberately obstinate, Well you asked us because we have a reputation for knowing what to do. I'd expect you could take it on trust that we don't ask for things we don't need?



but I am afraid I still do not follow as to why it is important to post a copy of a PCN. If you take the time you will find endless cases on here where we have won because the documents are legally flawed. I've already told you reading BL PCNs were duff at last sight - albeit some time ago.


If you let me know the parts of the Penalty Notice that are relevant I will happily type these. That will not be accepted by anyone here.

I probably should have been clearer in my initial post when I asked for "any suggestions". I was thinking in terms of anyone successfully appealing that the cumulative amount of successive penalties is excessive, even though each one relates to a separate date and time, and that in light of an honest and genuine mistake (which will not now be repeated as I have learned that this is now a bus lane!) one penalty is enough? The Council has not lost anything financially by my infringements and as I can expect to receive up to 15 Penalty Notices I am hoping that the total amount in charges might be viewed as unreasonable. There is no direct legal basis. I do agree with you though. However, first things first - show what is asked or -------- EDIT.

paternoster
Hope this works!



Neil B
It's better than the last I saw but still flawed.

Regs here >> http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2005/2757/contents/made

The PCN describes the 28 day period as >> 'within 28 days of the date of service'. This is wrong as it effectively adds a day which puts you at risk.

The correct period as described in the Regs Part 3 para 7 is

“the 28 day period”, in relation to a penalty charge notice, means the period of 28 days beginning with the date of service of the notice.

The PCN aslo descibes the 14 day period similarly and again wrongly.

The correct period is in para 8 (5)(f) of the Regs.

-----------------
There are further errors I'll explain later but see how you get your head round this one first. Ask what questions you need to.

-----------------

On the matter of multiple PCNs before awareness -- as I said, yep, agree with you. Problem is they can!!!! I think it's abuse of the use of CCTV personally and goes against the educational purpose aspect of issuing a PCN. I've only known one Council cancel multiples on a discretionary basis.
If you were to go to adjudication on just that then the adjudicator cannot legally find in your favour - but can 'recommend' cancellation.

You are much better off getting your head round the technicalities. IMO an adjudicator would be sympathetic to the multiple PCN matter - so giving them a reason to find for you (legally) will please them as much as you.

-
Busymum
I too have just received one of these for the exact same road and having used this route for years I was not aware it had changed. The restriction used to be you could not use the road before 4pm and now it has changed to you cannot use it after 4pm. I was not aware this is a bus lane and am sure there is no writing in the road. I did not notice the time had changed on the sign and will try to upload a picture of it.

Can anyone help? Thanks.
Neil B
QUOTE (Busymum @ Sun, 8 May 2011 - 09:15) *
Can anyone help? Thanks.


Well, erm, did I not post some info?

How much do u understand so far.

------------
It is also important not to hijack other threads and start one for your own case.
Neil B
QUOTE (paternoster @ Fri, 6 May 2011 - 12:58) *
Does anyone have any suggestions in case the Council do not show leniency?


As I've said, you are going to have to get your head round the technicalities and use them to your benefit.

You've stated you are new and queried why necessary to show the PCN. As I said, there are endless threads that show why - and our record - we win!

Having encountered Reading in a few cases I very much doubt they are going to be reasonable -- BUT -- as I explained, an adjudicator would be sympathetic - and hence more readily find on technical issues.

The matters of timescale I've mentioned so far are backed up by key previous adjudications and the findings of at least one High Ct case. In other words, present correctly and you should win.
-------------

If you can give some indication that you are developing some understanding then I can link the cases for you to read yourself.

--------

EDIT. You should also be investigating signage. Is it there? Is it correct? Got pics?

Your point about the marshalls - both present and absent -- has no direct legal worth that I can think of but again goes some way to get an adjudicator on your side.
Aretnap
QUOTE (paternoster @ Fri, 6 May 2011 - 15:07) *
Again, can I emphasise that I am not being deliberately obstinate, but I am afraid I still do not follow as to why it is important to post a copy of a PCN. I am not disputing that it is my car that is in the photograph, or that I am driving it, or that it took place at the date and time they state. Apologies if this is not what you have in mind, but I wouldn't want to try to wriggle out of these Penalty Notices by arguing something technical based on images, etc...

I probably should have been clearer in my initial post when I asked for "any suggestions". I was thinking in terms of anyone successfully appealing that the cumulative amount of successive penalties is excessive, even though each one relates to a separate date and time, and that in light of an honest and genuine mistake (which will not now be repeated as I have learned that this is now a bus lane!) one penalty is enough? The Council has not lost anything financially by my infringements and as I can expect to receive up to 15 Penalty Notices I am hoping that the total amount in charges might be viewed as unreasonable.


Your attitude of not wanting to wriggle out on a technicality is laudable, and what one would expect of someone who generally behaves honestly and reasonably and expects other people to do the same.

Unfortunately PCNs have become a cash cow for councils, and you're a prime target. A reasonable council might cancel most or all of the PCNs on the grounds you suggest, and warn you to be more careful in future as they wouldn't show such leniency again. However, a council looking to make money will just insist that you pay.

The independant ajudicators meanwhile only have the authority to cancel PCNs according to the strict letter of the law; they can't consider mitigating circumstances, reasonableness or natural justice (though if they feel that natural justice has been breached, they may be more willing to cancel on a technicality).

So unless the signage is deficient or the council show an unexepected amount of reasonableness, your best hope of getting these tickets cancelled is a defect in the wording on the PCN. A technicality if you will - but don't think of it as such. The law imposes duties on you both - you have to keep out of bus lanes, and the council has to word their PCNs correctly. If the council is going to insist that you keep your side of the bargain so strictly as to send you 15 PCNs, you shouldn't be ashamed of insisting equally strictly that they keep to theirs.
Neil B
QUOTE (Aretnap @ Sun, 8 May 2011 - 15:23) *
(though if they feel that natural justice has been breached, they may be more willing to cancel on a technicality). Precisely!!!

So unless the signage is deficient or the council show an unexepected amount of reasonableness, your best hope of getting these tickets cancelled is a defect in the wording on the PCN. A technicality if you will - but don't think of it as such. The law imposes duties on you both - you have to keep out of bus lanes, and the council has to word their PCNs correctly. If the council is going to insist that you keep your side of the bargain so strictly as to send you 15 PCNs, you shouldn't be ashamed of insisting equally strictly that they keep to theirs.

Well put.


At this point, at least some kind of acknowledging comment would be appropriate!! Or maybe this is why it's so easy for Reading to rake it in?

Funny how people are so willing to accept a certain document like a PCN does not have to be accurate??? Yet it demands twelve fivers -- and if you send in those twelve fivers without, say, serial numbers, see how quick the Council will cry foul!
paternoster
Thank you very much for your input, guys. It is greatly appreciated.

I follow what you are saying totally and clearly, NeilB, and would welcome the further information which you are able to provide.

Thanks again.
Neil B
Actually only one other flaw I can see. Can't clearly read all the reps grounds.

At bottom of front they say, if not paid or challeged they 'will' issue a charge certificate. Kinda topical given your hope they intend to be reasonable?

The Regs actually say this >>
(k)that if at the end of the 28 day period—

(i)no representations have been made; and

(ii)the penalty charge has not been paid,

the authority may increase the penalty charge by a half and take steps to enforce payment of the charge as so increased;


Progression of enforcement is and should always be discretionary. The law does not allow a definite intention to enforce because the Council can, as you hope, cancel for discretionary reasons.
Not normally a really major point -- but -- given your circumstances, more relevant than usual.

-------------
The timescale point is the likely winner and I'll post some links later.
paternoster
Thanks again, NeilB. I continue to be appreciative of your assistance and will look forward to the links being published.
Busymum
Thanks also from me Neil B. I am also reading with interest.

Can anyone explain what the process is if I too intend to challenge this?

Also if I lose the challenge will I have to pay the full amount of £60 or will it be £30 as I have taken action within the specified time scale? I think it will be worth pursuing it as I am expecting more than one PCN to arrive.

In addition, does it not matter that the form states this the contravention is for driving in a "Bus Lane" and yet there are no markings on the road to reflect this?

Many thanks

Neil B
QUOTE (paternoster @ Mon, 9 May 2011 - 12:36) *
Thanks again, NeilB. I continue to be appreciative of your assistance and will look forward to the links being published.


The matter of those timescales was pretty much slam-dunked in a High Court case.

You might find the whole thing interesting but item 45+ particularly.

http://www.parkingandtrafficappeals.gov.uk...gust%202006.pdf

+++++

click on Al's Bar >>> http://keycases.parkingandtrafficappeals.g...ndex.php#search

-------

What might initially seem to be minor, unimportant technicalities are thankfully taken very seriously by those that count! As Aretnap said, why would you put up with a Council basically being incompetent but demanding a penalty from you for a genuine mistake. Do you drive around with a large and highly qualified Legal Dept in the car - no - but they have one who are hopeless!
Brookesy
I am in exactly the same position as Paternoster ie same road I used everyday for 5 years and now a bus lane between 4pm and 7pm whereas before there was no restriction after 4pm. I think the signage is also a problem. I have a law degree but specialise in tax so I don't have knowledge of how signs should look. Basically the "old" sign is still in place saying restrictions in place until 4pm. Then there is a new flourescent (home made looking) sign that is difficult to see until very close to it due to the fact the traffic lights at the junction have been covered so you have to be watching the junction carefully. That sign says do a u-turn between 4pm and 7pm. Then at the point the road goes left into the buses only section there is a correct sign (but too late by then as there is nowhere to turn around). I attach copies of the signs - does anyone know if they meet the legal requirements?

Also, Reading have put a document on their web site with the road changes and there is no mention of any changes to Minster Street where the alleged offenses took place.

Thanks for the information so far by the way!
Neil B
Well, you all have plenty to play with. Now your turn to start asking questions on anything not clear.

You should all start investigating the signage - link in a mo brooksey.

BUT --- let's educate the Reading crew --- STAR YOUR OWN FECKIN THREADS!!! (before the mods get upset!) strict forum rule.

If ya need it explained >>>

members will be following your cases, even if they haven't contributed so far. Timescales are crucially important and must not be confused case to case. Comprende?


EDIT http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/3113/contents/made
-
Busymum
Thanks again Neil B but not being familar with the etiquette of starting your own thread do you mean a separate thread for Reading? or for each individual affected. I thought by adding to a thread created by paternoster that was the right thing to do. Apologies if that is not the case.

I have clicked on the links you have suggested and read the articles which did have some relevance (I think) so thanks for that.

However I am not sure as to the sequence of events, I.e what I should do next. I will go away and search through the site as I guess there may be more help that I just haven't found yet but any guidance would be much appreciated.

Essentially how do I appeal?

What would you suggest to be my best grounds?

Is it relevant that the PCN states that this is a bus lane but that this is not clear?

Thanks

Neil B
QUOTE (Busymum @ Mon, 9 May 2011 - 16:30) *
Thanks again Neil B but not being familar with the etiquette of starting your own thread do you mean a separate thread for Reading? or for each individual affected. The latter - as I explained - because of relevant dates and members watching who may input. Near top right of screen - 'new topic'

I thought by adding to a thread created by paternoster that was the right thing to do. Apologies if that is not the case. Not that bad an idea but the deadline dates are so important to each of you individually.

I have clicked on the links you have suggested and read the articles which did have some relevance (I think) so thanks for that.

However I am not sure as to the sequence of events, I.e what I should do next. I will go away and search through the site as I guess there may be more help that I just haven't found yet but any guidance would be much appreciated.

Essentially how do I appeal? You have one shot at the Council for these. When they reject, you appeal to the adjudicator. An adjudication is not as formal as you might imagine.

What would you suggest to be my best grounds?
The best legal grounds are that the PCN is flawed and therefore invalid. Reading must also be seen to act reasonably and at least consider exercising their discretion - e.g for multiple PCNs as paternoster and yourself expect.
The signage issue also has potential but I haven't looked at the pics of brooksey yet. You lot need to start doing some work yourselves!

Is it relevant that the PCN states that this is a bus lane but that this is not clear? As you say. May indeed be relevant - so check out other bus lane threads, signage legislation link I gave (hard work that one to get through) and your own pics.


Thanks


please remember that although you all say you were caught at the same location and we're presumimg you all have identical PCNs, we need to see. Members here know that we have all too often been told something or some interpretation that has turned out to not be the case. hence again - own threads.

I also don't think that was ALL of the PCN was it? Just one sheet?
Neil B
Looking at the pics I can see this looks ridiculous.

A bit beyond my immediate knowledge but surely the contravention is against the sign shown - not 'being in a bus lane' ??? As someone said, there are no bus lane markings so how can you contravene as alleged?

At least one of you needs to get hold of the Traffic Order that creates the restriction and supposed bus lane.

---
With limited shots at appeal you need to get as much of this together as possible. use all available ammo.
phil_a_rdg
The Reading PCN would appear to follow DoT's guidance:

http://www.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk/d...ding_of_PCN.pdf

"The legal effect of the “within” formula is to exclude the date of issue of the PCN
from the calculation of time and therefore to extend by one day the time for the
recipient of the PCN to pay. Real prejudice cannot be said to arise from extending
time for payment. Thus, a PCN based on the DoT model is unlikely to attract
criticism from the Adjudicator."

(My only interest is that I have also received a PCN for the same infringement as the original poster.)
Neil B
QUOTE (phil_a_rdg @ Tue, 10 May 2011 - 15:00) *
The Reading PCN would appear to follow DoT's guidance:

http://www.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk/d...ding_of_PCN.pdf

"The legal effect of the “within” formula is to exclude the date of issue of the PCN
from the calculation of time and therefore to extend by one day the time for the
recipient of the PCN to pay. Real prejudice cannot be said to arise from extending
time for payment. Thus, a PCN based on the DoT model is unlikely to attract
criticism from the Adjudicator."

(My only interest is that I have also received a PCN for the same infringement as the original poster.)


Good find but the need for 'certainty' of the period remains. The High Ct case linked covers this IIRC. as does Al's Bar.

I would encourage any appelant to pre-empt any doubts on the part of an adjudicator by asking for simple info from the Council. That is, whatever the PCN says, PROVE to me that you will NOT actually progress enforcement at the time allowed by the correct statutory period and WILL actually allow that extra day. Otherwise, of course, the prejudice is obvious.

This requires details of how their software systems are set up and how exactly progression takes place. The relevant document being a Charge Certificate. Is it auto generated? Does it require manual input/confirmation?

this arose in a case i can't quite recall.

Apart from the chance a system being set up in a prejudicial way, the chance of a Council Dept actually knowing how it works and being able to answer such a question is remote.
Brookesy
The sign was changed and the times corrected yesterday (10 May 2011)! They still don't comply with the traffic sign regulations as far as I can see and there are no bus lane markings on the road. Thanks Neil B - I'll try to get a copy of the Traffic Order.
paternoster
A brief update, though there is not much to report.

I made representations on several grounds to Reading Borough Council almost two weeks ago regarding the PCNs. RBC have yet to respond to my representations but they still have time in which to do.

What is interesting is that I was expecting to receive further PCN notices up until 5 May 2011 which is the date I received the first PCN and, subsequently, the date I stopped using this particular route. I have not received any notices in the last two weeks and the most recent one related to 27 April 2011. I gather others have received PCNs relating to dates after 27 April 2011 but mine seem to have dried up.

RBC have removed the large sign which stated the restricted hours for use of the route to be between 11.00 and 16.00 from King's Road in Reading and, as Brookesy has correctly stated, this occurred on 10 May 2011.

I believe that RBC have been inundated by letters and representations from members of the public in relation to this route which may explain why there has been no response so far. Since this matter came to light it has been the subject of articles in the local press. Judging by what RBC are reported to have said, they are not changing their position and believe that the incorrect sign on King's Road is immaterial. I do not agree!

It will be interesting to see how they respond to my representations when they get round to doing so. I will post anything of relevance in this thread.

Thanks again to all for their contributions.
Kevin Lee
HI I two have how sent in 3 pcn with 4 more to do. The latest 2 pcn's are for the 2nd May(arrived at my home 20th May....
I have been staggering my returns so that I get the max time on each just in case. The total is up to 7 but as you say has dried up now, I stopped driving with my first one which came in on the 15th May. I did not use the road every day but was still waiting for a few more.
I sent in an email to the Reading Chronicle asking for info on the reporting of the TRO's and explained why. They asked if they could use the email in there letter section and I am now the letter of the week So every cloud as they say....
Currently I am only 5 days in to waiting for the council to reply. I took Neil's advice and worded my appeal as a series of questions which I have copied in below for anyone else to make use of. From what I hear, the appeals will likely be rejected and then have to go for arbitration.....


Dear sir/Madam.
I am appealing the serving of a PCN notice xxxx on the grounds that it is flawed. I am 53 years old and have been driving for more than 30 years and have a clean licence. I am not in the habit of breaking the law surrounding road use. This is a road I have driven down for nearly 2 years driving my daughter to work and dropping her off at the back door to xxxx near the Oracle. When I started this I checked the details on the allowable times to use the road. I found there has been a notice in force saying that I was allowed to drive down this road before 11am and after 4pm making it illegal to use during the busy part of the day. I have always obeyed these times. At no time, has this road been anything other than a restricted road and never listed as a bus lane and at no time have I seen anything to tell me the signs had been changed. The fact the times are swapped means even the numbers have not changed, just there order. I would challenge any long term driver on a road to spot a time change like this without being prompted to look harder by a highly visible ‘new sign’.

I would like RBC to answer the following questions about what I believe is the flawed use of the PCN in this case;
1. Why did RBC not think it was necessary to indicate that the road was now a bus lane with signs, warning notices or road markings?
2. Why did RBC not think it was necessary to warn the drivers on this road that the times were changing or even when the sign had changed, why did they not feel the need to point out the new sign in force?
3. Why did RBC not use marshals to warn Motorists about this change as they did on other various 'changes of route' around Reading?
4. The pictures in the PCN come from a Camera that is mounted on a post by the Oracle, why did the council not think it necessary to have a camera in operation sign before a driver turned into the road or even label the camera post itself?
5. Use of the word “within” and the actual wording of the regulation as to when the date of service should be does not conform to the official instructions. Why is this?
6. One of the rules I have read about bus lane cameras states; "The camera or observation should record the approach to and the passing of the sign(s) and subsequent movement by the vehicle including whether it parks, stops or travels along the restricted route," The camera in Minster Street does not seem to comply with this, why?
7. I asked RBC to see a copy of the TRO (Traffic Regulation Order) for the road to see the new change listed for Minster Street but so far this has not been produced, why?
8. Why does the only document (flyer) I have from RBC about the changes to the traffic system and bus routes, just shows Minster street as a green road and the document says ’Access restriction times will CONTINUE to apply as signed at all town centre entry points’ and does not mention that the times of entry have changed or that Minster Street has changed its designation to a bus lane? Why? Note. Copy of map is included in this submission.
9. Why was the sign telling of the change in times not changed until the 10th May As reported in some of the many web forums on this issue?
10. Why was the access restriction swapped over so that now during the major busy part of the day (11am to 4pm), drivers can now drive through the road?
11. Provisional guidance on bus lane (including tramway) enforcement in England outside London
http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/regional/buses/g...buslane3570.pdf state in section 4.10 state SIGNING
4.10. Local Authorities should check that signs comply with the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions, are up to date, consistent with the Traffic Regulation Orders and are properly and visibly mounted. This will avoid challenges on the grounds of inadequate, inconsistent or defective signing. Drivers and riders need to be alerted to the fact that cameras are being used to enforce bus lanes and before enforcement can commence, camera enforcement signs should be erected in each of the areas to be covered by the system to advise motorists that camera enforcement is in place and to encourage compliance. Signs informing road users about camera enforcement must conform to diagrams 878 and 879 in the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002. The Department’s working drawings for diagrams 878 and 879, including the bus lane camera variants, can be found on the DfT website at www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_roads/documents/divisionhomepage/032478.hcsp

Why did RBC not follow these instructions?
12. From the same document,
WARNING PENALTY CHARGE NOTICES
4.11. It is recommended that for a limited period (about two weeks) after cameras are
installed and fully operational, authorities should not send a PCN to motorists
contravening the bus lane regulations but write to them explaining the changes to
enforcement procedures and that in the future such contravention will result in a
penalty charge. This will allow those who regularly contravene to change their habits.
4. Scheme design
114.12. Authorities may also wish to consider whether, in the interests of good public
relations, a warning letter rather than a PCN should be issued the first time that a
vehicle is detected contravening bus lane regulations irrespective of when civil
enforcement was introduced.

Why did RBC not take the suggested route to advise and warn by letter and not PCN notice?
13. Why did it take so long to process the image and send the PCN out? This in my first case and took 15 days to process, a time in which I have driven down the road several more times.

Since the sending of the first PCN, I have not driven down this road, however, I do see that many other drivers still are in large numbers. To me this means that the change RBC have made has not been made clear to myself or many other road users in Reading. I have supporting photographs of all signage and road markings if you need to see copies of these.

I would like your answers to the questions I have listed above as soon as possible please.
Regards
Neil B
Well I didn't quite mean a direct list of questions - rather just a questioning stance - kinda thang.

Never mind, it serves a purpose.

You will need to improve the bit about the 'within' wording for next stage if needed. Read Al's Bar, etc.

--------------
On signage, I posted in another thread. Seems that they can do this. Bus lane is defined differently outside London. See Tspt Act 2000 S144. Compared to LLA 1996.
paternoster
UPDATE: REPRESENTATIONS SUCCESSFUL

I have finally had a response from Reading Borough Council.

RBC have pointed out that the PCNs issued for Minster Street/Gun Street were issued correctly; however, they have exercised discretion and cancelled all PCNs issued to me, with one exception. The exception is the very first PCN I received and which I paid instantly; to be honest, I didn't expect that one to be cancelled and I can live with that!

No reason has been given as to why discretion has been exercised.

Thanks to all who posted in the thread with advice and guidance. Good luck to anyone else who is in dispute with RBC and, if I can help out, feel free to PM me.
Neil B
Nice one.

I think we have them on the back foot.
-
bama
get this in the local press as a story if you can.

they will carry on issuing and many will not fight the PCNs.

and well done !
Busymum
I sent in my appeal on the17th May and to date have received no response.

I telephoned today to chase and was told that I should have received a response within 10-14 days but that due to the fact my appeal had been passed to Head Office it would take another 10-14 days huh.gif

I was then put through into head office and told that my case was still being considered! and that RBC do not issue acknowledgements or updates and expect the motorist to contact them. They are apparently very busy!!!

I questioned why my cheque had been cashed ( I took the decision to send a cheque as if my appeal failed I din;t want to have to pay £60 but stated in my letter that it should not be cashed.

RBC policy is to cash all cheques even if they have been asked not to and even if the submission is the subject of an appeal!

RBC are unable to advise me of when I could expect to receive a response.

The wait goes on.

Busy Mum
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.