Free Traffic Legal Advice

You need to go to the right Redbridge page to get the details.

There are process challenges to London bus lanes others may help with.

Yes you should have waited behind the cyclist - that was a daft manoeuvre.

Yes it does. The tapered part is not the bus lane commencement. This is clearly an offside bus lane. I will be back with  a draft when I look at the video. The PCN is invalid too as it states "will" serve and Enforcement Notice.  Should say "may".

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/1996/9/section/4/enacted

(e)that, if the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period, an enforcement notice may be served by the council on the person appearing to them to be the owner of the vehicle;

https://www.standard.co.uk/hp/front/bus-lane-driver-exposes-flaw-in-penalty-notices-6487620.html#:~:text=The%20legality%20of%20thousands%20of%20bus%20lane%20fines,Eden%20Street,%20Kingston%20upon%20Thames,%20in%20his%20Rover.

By the way, it was my son driving not I.

**

I helped with this one.

ETA Register of Appeals
Register kept under Regulation 20 of the Road Traffic (Parking Adjudicators) (London) Regulations 1993, as amended and Regulation 17 of the Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Representations and Appeals) (England) Regulations 2022.
Case Details
Case reference 2100649871
Appellant Grace Elizabeth Wheatland
Authority Royal Borough of Kingston Upon Thames
VRM X653XFX
PCN Details
PCN KT55276825
Contravention date 20 May 2010
Contravention time 08:49:00
Contravention location Eden Street
Penalty amount GBP 120.00
Contravention Being in a bus lane
Referral date -
Decision Date 12 May 2011
Adjudicator Michael Burke
Appeal decision Appeal allowed
Direction cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and the Enforcement Notice.
Reasons The allegation in this case is that the vehicle was in the bus lane during the hours of operation. Miss Wheatland does not dispute this but criticises the quality of the bus lane signage. I have considered very carefully the criticisms she makes but having considered her evidence together with Google Street View I am satisfied that the bus lane signage was clear and adequate and that any respect in which it failed to comply with Traffic Signs, Regulations and General Directions 2002 or Traffic Signs Manual 2008 would come within the de minimis rule as too trifling to be regarded.

In the circumstances Miss Wheatland could have had no complaint had she been required to pay a penalty charge. However, I have also had to consider part of the wording on the face of the PCN.

Miss Wheatland asserts that the PCN is non-compliant in stating that in the event of failure to make representations or a payment 'an Enforcement Notice will be served' rather than 'may be served'. He refers to a PCN cancelled by this Local Authority on similar grounds.

It is an enduring mystery why Local Authorities seem unable simply to copy out the words of the statute or statutory instrument imposing formal requirements. It is not sufficient for the Local Authority to say as here that they have subsequently amended the wording. They have given no good reason for departing from the statutory wording in the first place. However, the fact that the Enforcement Authority depart from the formal wording of a statute or statutory instrument does not necessarily invalidate the document. The question I have to consider is whether the PCN was substantially compliant.

I regard this as a borderline case. Having considered the matter very carefully I do not feel able to say that the wording on the PCN is substantially compliant and accordingly I allow the appeal.

I wonder whether they have authorisation? This outfit only recommenced issuing bus lane PCNs a few years back.

I will ask council and DFT separately.

Thank you Hippocrates - all above is clear.

I’ve been doing some research and definitely with respect to the bus lane markings have found there is wiggle room. More research tonight, will start to write up tomorrow and make adjustments if and when new information from the council comes through!

Evening Hippocrates, am I good to send this off to challenge the PCN? Or am I to hold on till the information regarding the authorisation is received from the council?

I am appealing the PCN on the following grounds:

1. Inadequate or Missing Signage – No Evidence of Contravention
The video evidence provided does not show any traffic signs that I allegedly passed which would indicate a contravention. Without clear and visible signage, I could not have been reasonably aware that a restriction was in place. According to the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions (TSRGD), traffic signs must be clearly visible and properly placed for any restriction to be enforceable. The absence of such signs in the footage undermines the basis for the PCN.

2. Procedural Impropriety – Fettering of Discretion
The PCN issued states that the authority “will” issue an Enforcement Notice if payment is not made. This wording is a departure from the mandatory statutory language under the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) General Regulations 2007, which requires the authority to retain discretion at all stages. By indicating a mandatory next step rather than a discretionary one, the PCN unlawfully fetters the authority’s discretion, amounting to procedural impropriety and rendering the notice invalid.

3. De Minimis and Safety Justification – Momentary Bus Lane Entry
The video evidence shows that only a very minor part of the vehicle entered the bus lane, and only momentarily. This was done solely to safely avoid a cyclist, not to gain any advantage or to make material use of the lane. There was no obstruction, no delay to any bus service, and no benefit obtained from the incursion. The movement was clearly incidental and necessary to ensure safety. This minor encroachment falls within the de minimis principle and does not constitute a substantive contravention.

I understand what you are saying and although its unlikely it will be taken into account, the signs on the left are often hidden or obscured by at least 2 double decker buses at a time.