3. Ealing PCN - 53J restriction on vehicles entering a pedestrian zone - Allenby Rd Southall & Oldfield Ln South Greenford
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic: Ealing PCN - 53J restriction on vehicles entering a pedestrian zone - Allenby Rd Southall & Oldfield Ln South Greenford  (Read 1935 times)

0 Members and 86 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Ealing PCN - 53J restriction on vehicles entering a pedestrian zone - Allenby Rd Southall & Oldfield Ln South Greenf
« Reply #15 on: »
Really we need to see the approach to the sign and how the sign appears and the actual sign itself.
You have valid points on amount of text to read and absorb, but I expect this is a 20mph zone, so that lessens the point as you're going slowly enough to read the sign. The sign is the usual "Flying Motorbike" sign that has been around for donkey's years, but now in widespread use in London. You also mention an advance sign, so can we see that.

Sorry about all this, but unless we can see what you saw, its very difficult to advise on an appeal text. I get the impression you are new to London, because these timed closed streets have been around now for several years.
Logged
Re: Ealing PCN - 53J restriction on vehicles entering a pedestrian zone - Allenby Rd Southall & Oldfield Ln South Greenf
« Reply #16 on: »
We'll...I did not see any of the signs ;D

But yes, we want to assess them fully for what they are.

Best I can do is send image of the map provided by Ealing council in their rejection notice. This is the only evidence I have that the warning sign exists. Note the final entry sign is a bit different on their map to the one it situ (it's 9 lines whereas the actual one has 10 lines and 2 additional words).

Logged
Re: Ealing PCN - 53J restriction on vehicles entering a pedestrian zone - Allenby Rd Southall & Oldfield Ln South Greenf
« Reply #17 on: »
Obviously when we see both signs shown like this whilst calmly sipping a cup of tea in front of our computer screen, it all seems very clear and above board.
Logged
Re: Ealing PCN - 53J restriction on vehicles entering a pedestrian zone - Allenby Rd Southall & Oldfield Ln South Greenf
« Reply #18 on: »
Quote from: FH123 on Yesterday at 10:39:11 am
Obviously when we see both signs shown like this whilst calmly sipping a cup of tea in front of our computer screen, it all seems very clear and above board.
Well, no, even though it may seem so. Signage giving instructions and warnings to motorists must first of all be "traffic signs" as defined in The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016. That is a basic requirement. Then what is erected must pass the "adequacy" test. This is a requirement in Regulation 18 of The Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996.

So two tests must be passed. In your case the advance warning sign is not a traffic sign. If it had been a geographical representation of the junction ahead with the left turn marked as No Entry it would be part of the signage indicating the restriction. For the signs themselves, they may comply with the TSRGD 2016, but if there is only one of them, it may fail the 'adequacy' test.  However, 'adequate' is subjective. Your 'inadequate' is the councils 'adequate' so the only place to test this is at London Tribunals where the adjudicator will decide one way or the other.

Here are the two sets of regulations:-
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/9/made
and
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1996/2489/contents

So if you are prepared to stand your ground and take them to London Tribunals based on the above, you could win, but of course it is not guaranteed, and you must risk the full PCN penalty. If you win you pay nothing, if you lose, you pay the PCN penalty, but there are no other costs.
Logged
Re: Ealing PCN - 53J restriction on vehicles entering a pedestrian zone - Allenby Rd Southall & Oldfield Ln South Greenf
« Reply #19 on: »
Yes I understand. Is there a reasonable chance of winning at a tribunal? Are they impartial? Do they listen to sound, logical arguments?

BTW I work in human factors information design. As an expert in that field I can say a multi line text instruction at a junction will never, ever pass an objective adequacy test. i.e. out of 100 human motorists with clean licenses, how many would notice, read, comprehend and make the correct decision whilst driving down that road for the first time under the same conditions. No doubt some would, but I would not expect this to be the norm.

That is why I quoted the human factors study above. It says signs should be visual and 2-3 lines maximum of text at 30 mph. Otherwise not only are they unreadable, but become a hazard for any motorist trying to comply.
Logged
Re: Ealing PCN - 53J restriction on vehicles entering a pedestrian zone - Allenby Rd Southall & Oldfield Ln South Greenf
« Reply #20 on: »
Yeah, fine. All stuff to put into your appeal at London Tribunals, but the important thing is, is the signage compliant with the regulations ? Adjudicators can only decide on law, and cannot take mitigation into account.

So, if you're going to stand your ground and take them to London Tribunals, please post a draft text here for review updated to reflect requirements of regulations plus the commonsense stuff you have outlined. Break the appeal into chuncks with suitable headings to make it easy for rushed adjudicators to read easily,
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]
« previous next »
  3. Ealing PCN - 53J restriction on vehicles entering a pedestrian zone - Allenby Rd Southall & Oldfield Ln South Greenford