Author Topic: Bus Lane Merton PCN (Read 571 times)

mg_driver · « **on:** August 31, 2024, 10:45:27 am »

Hey, it is me again.

My wife drove over bus lane, she was saying big lorry was in front of her and she could not see road signs.
This time council provided pretty solid evidences - I do not think there is any room for objections.
Before advising this to my wife, would like to check with an experts.
So this is the PCN itself
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/f1d8tvpihy1ajnrzhggcb/Penalty-Charge-Notice.pdf?rlkey=srcsgw8y868q081aqw5ipijbb&st=xc9en03h&dl=0

Incandescent · « **Reply #1 on:** August 31, 2024, 11:13:13 am »

I see no big lorry in front of her as she drives past a Buses Only sign. So the contravention would seem to be made out.

HOwever, this is not the be-all-and-end-all, as there may be a fatal error in the PCN or in their enforcement processes that you access on their website. Councils have to obey the law same as you. So please post Page 2 of the PCN, and wait a bit for others to comment who are up-to-speed on Merton Council. Do not pay yet, but don't miss the deadline for the discount if you're minded to pay, and nobody has commented.

Hippocrates · « **Reply #2 on:** August 31, 2024, 12:18:46 pm »

Hello me again.

First, it is not a bus lane but a bus gate.

Their website grounds:

Moving Traffic reasons
The following reasons relate to moving traffic contraventions

Select a reason:

There was no contravention of a prescribed order or failure to comply with an indication
I was not the owner of the vehicle
My vehicle was stolen / taken without my consent
The vehicle was on hire to someone else
The penalty charge exceeded the amount applicable in the circumstances of the case
A friend / family member recently passed away
I am a Blue Badge holder
I did not realise I was in contravention
I have already paid the PCN
I performed the contravention due to my medical condition
I performed the contravention to avoid congestion
I was avoiding an accident
I was following a diversion
I was following my sat-nav / I was lost / I'm not from the area
I was making way for an emergency vehicle
I was not at the location on the day
I was not the driver
I was unaware of the rules
I was unaware that a PCN had been issued as I've been away
My vehicle had broken down
My vehicle is a taxi / private hire vehicle
My vehicle was cloned
The owner of the vehicle has passed away

None of the above

If none of the above reasons apply, and you wish to challenge your PCN, please select below:

Select a reason:

Any other reason

*****

I would simply write at this stage that the sign was not visible. Keep it simple. (To me, it also looks twisted a little and is very high up. And the legend on the road is not clear as it is faded.) As ever, happy to do this one for you.

mg_driver · « **Reply #3 on:** August 31, 2024, 03:13:34 pm »

Quote from: Incandescent on August 31, 2024, 11:13:13 am

I see no big lorry in front of her as she drives past a Buses Only sign. So the contravention would seem to be made out.

HOwever, this is not the be-all-and-end-all, as there may be a fatal error in the PCN or in their enforcement processes that you access on their website. Councils have to obey the law same as you. So please post Page 2 of the PCN, and wait a bit for others to comment who are up-to-speed on Merton Council. Do not pay yet, but don't miss the deadline for the discount if you're minded to pay, and nobody has commented.

Here we go - this is a page 2 of the PCN
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/6xipn7x6jop5q6sijdse8/HOW-TO-MAKE-REPRESENTATIONS.pdf?rlkey=ki1st849eq2qpov96nld62o3n&st=6uo5b2ny&dl=0

mg_driver · « **Reply #4 on:** August 31, 2024, 03:22:28 pm »

Quote from: Hippocrates on August 31, 2024, 12:18:46 pm

Hello me again.

First, it is not a bus lane but a bus gate.

Their website grounds:

Moving Traffic reasons
The following reasons relate to moving traffic contraventions

...................
..................
..................

None of the above

If none of the above reasons apply, and you wish to challenge your PCN, please select below:

Select a reason:

Any other reason

*****

I would simply write at this stage that the sign was not visible. Keep it simple. (To me, it also looks twisted a little and is very high up. And the legend on the road is not clear as it is faded.) As ever, happy to do this one for you.

Hey Hippocrates,

Let's see if anything comes from reviewing the second page of the PCN. If it turns out to be the best course of action, I'd be happy to file the objection myself. I'm very grateful for all your helpful advice, and I don't want to take up your time on something so minor.

Hippocrates · « **Reply #5 on:** August 31, 2024, 04:20:21 pm »

The PCN is ok. I would simply go with my draft if you are the reg. keeper. Just researching TSM Chapter Three and more detailed draft at present. Bear with me please until later this evening.

TSM Chapter Three:

9.7.6. The “BUS GATE” road marking to diagram 1048.5 (S9‑6‑15, see Figure 9-27) may
be used in conjunction with 953 series upright signs, and with diagram 616 (no entry) when
accompanied by a plate that exempts buses, as shown in Figure 9-25 and Figure 9-26. The
regulations do not permit it to be used with diagram 617 or 619, even if these signs have a bus
exemption.
9.7.7. This replaces the previously prescribed diagrams 1048.3 “BUS ONLY” and 1048.4 “BUS
AND (cycle symbol) ONLY”. Unlike the “BUS ONLY” marking, the “BUS GATE” marking can be
used where the restricted access applies for only part of the day or where the road may be used
by vehicles other than buses, cycles and taxis (e.g. solo motor cycles or “except for access”).
It also takes up less space than the previous “BUS AND (cycle symbol) ONLY” marking,
which might have been difficult to place in a very short bus gate. The legend may be laid in a
single line or in two lines depending on the carriageway or lane width available. Two sizes are
prescribed; the smaller size will be appropriate for most situations. The larger size might be
used where greater emphasis is required.

mg_driver · « **Reply #6 on:** August 31, 2024, 06:45:30 pm »

Quote from: Hippocrates on August 31, 2024, 04:20:21 pm

The PCN is ok. I would simply go with my draft if you are the reg. keeper. Just researching TSM Chapter Three and more detailed draft at present. Bear with me please until later this evening.

Will do, thank you Hippocrates.

Hippocrates · « **Reply #7 on:** August 31, 2024, 09:31:21 pm »

Dear Merton

Ref: PCN VRM

I make this formal representation as follows:

1. Signage: the sign is easily missed due to the lack of any warning signage and the plethora of accompanying signage. This is also placed too high.

2. I cite from Traffic Signs Manual Chapter Three:

TSM Chapter Three:

9.7.6. The “BUS GATE” road marking to diagram 1048.5 (S9‑6‑15, see Figure 9-27) may
be used in conjunction with 953 series upright signs, and with diagram 616 (no entry) when
accompanied by a plate that exempts buses, as shown in Figure 9-25 and Figure 9-26. The
regulations do not permit it to be used with diagram 617 or 619, even if these signs have a bus
exemption.
9.7.7. This replaces the previously prescribed diagrams 1048.3 “BUS ONLY” and 1048.4 “BUS
AND (cycle symbol) ONLY”. Unlike the “BUS ONLY” marking, the “BUS GATE” marking can be
used where the restricted access applies for only part of the day or where the road may be used
by vehicles other than buses, cycles and taxis (e.g. solo motor cycles or “except for access”).
It also takes up less space than the previous “BUS AND (cycle symbol) ONLY” marking,
which might have been difficult to place in a very short bus gate. The legend may be laid in a
single line or in two lines depending on the carriageway or lane width available. Two sizes are
prescribed; the smaller size will be appropriate for most situations. The larger size might be
used where greater emphasis is required.

Therefore, in light of the above, I request that the said PCN be cancelled forthwith.

Yours

Reg, keeper

mg_driver · « **Reply #8 on:** August 31, 2024, 09:51:02 pm »

Hippocrates - thank you very much, this is very helpful!

Hippocrates · « **Reply #9 on:** August 31, 2024, 10:01:12 pm »

It will make them think.

Hippocrates · « **Reply #10 on:** September 01, 2024, 12:30:25 pm »

Quote from: Hippocrates on August 31, 2024, 09:31:21 pm

Dear Merton

Ref: PCN VRM

I make this formal representation as follows:

1. Signage: the sign is easily missed due to the lack of any warning signage and the plethora of accompanying signage. This is also placed too high.

2. I cite from Traffic Signs Manual Chapter Three:

TSM Chapter Three:

9.7.6. The “BUS GATE” road marking to diagram 1048.5 (S9‑6‑15, see Figure 9-27) may
be used in conjunction with 953 series upright signs, and with diagram 616 (no entry) when
accompanied by a plate that exempts buses, as shown in Figure 9-25 and Figure 9-26. The
regulations do not permit it to be used with diagram 617 or 619, even if these signs have a bus
exemption.
9.7.7. This replaces the previously prescribed diagrams 1048.3 “BUS ONLY” and 1048.4 “BUS
AND (cycle symbol) ONLY”. Unlike the “BUS ONLY” marking, the “BUS GATE” marking can be
used where the restricted access applies for only part of the day or where the road may be used
by vehicles other than buses, cycles and taxis (e.g. solo motor cycles or “except for access”).
It also takes up less space than the previous “BUS AND (cycle symbol) ONLY” marking,
which might have been difficult to place in a very short bus gate. The legend may be laid in a
single line or in two lines depending on the carriageway or lane width available. Two sizes are
prescribed; the smaller size will be appropriate for most situations. The larger size might be
used where greater emphasis is required.

3. I rely upon Case No. 223048355A in which the Adjudicator found : The Council is correct in stating that there is no 56 day time limit in moving traffic cases. However I am not surprised that the Appellant missed the signs as they seem to me to be inadequate.

4. This ground on your website is incorrectly and confusedly expressed: The vehicle was on hire to someone else
So it follows that this can be the subject of a collateral challenge in terms of the validity of the PCN.

Therefore, in light of the above, I request that the said PCN be cancelled forthwith.

Yours

Reg, keeper
[/i]

mg_driver · « **Reply #11 on:** September 01, 2024, 08:34:54 pm »

It allows to put into appeal 1000 characters only and paragraph 9.7.7 does not fully fit - not even by half.
Also curious, what is so confusion about The vehicle was on hire to someone else?

Hippocrates · « **Reply #12 on:** September 01, 2024, 08:37:20 pm »

Quote from: mg_driver on September 01, 2024, 08:34:54 pm

It allows to put into appeal 1000 characters only and paragraph 9.7.7 does not fully fit - not even by half.
Also curious, what is so confusion about The vehicle was on hire to someone else?

Who hired it. Make a pdf

mg_driver · « **Reply #13 on:** September 01, 2024, 08:47:08 pm »

Quote from: Hippocrates on September 01, 2024, 08:37:20 pm

Who hired it. Make a pdf

Will attached this as evidences.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/ovgmqlpny7pj7iu3r3w39/Dear-Merton.pdf?rlkey=8iy3yuxwfgjbr7k9oq2ytgwh4&st=00taff6p&dl=0

In text box will put something like this:

Dear Merton,

Kindly refer to the attached document for the complete text of my appeal.

Hippocrates · « **Reply #14 on:** September 01, 2024, 11:18:49 pm »

Please keep us posted and don't ay it if they reject.

Free Traffic Legal Advice

Author Topic: Bus Lane Merton PCN (Read 571 times)

mg_driver

Bus Lane Merton PCN

Incandescent

Re: Bus Lane Merton PCN

Hippocrates

Re: Bus Lane Merton PCN

mg_driver

Re: Bus Lane Merton PCN

mg_driver

Re: Bus Lane Merton PCN

Hippocrates

Re: Bus Lane Merton PCN

mg_driver

Re: Bus Lane Merton PCN

Hippocrates

Re: Bus Lane Merton PCN

mg_driver

Re: Bus Lane Merton PCN

Hippocrates

Re: Bus Lane Merton PCN

Hippocrates

Re: Bus Lane Merton PCN

mg_driver

Re: Bus Lane Merton PCN

Hippocrates

Re: Bus Lane Merton PCN

mg_driver

Re: Bus Lane Merton PCN

Hippocrates

Re: Bus Lane Merton PCN