Free Traffic Legal Advice

That could have been me also
- https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/lancashire-county-council-pcn-34j-being-in-a-bus-lane-no-alternative-route/msg101795/#msg101795

Adjudicator's reasons:
"
1.    Mr [Redacted], on behalf of [Redacted] Ltd, appeals a Penalty Charge Notice (“PCN”) issued for driving in the Corporation Street bus gate in Lancaster on 29/10/2025 at 17:37.

2.    The vehicle in question is a 16m long, 44 tonne articulated lorry. The driver had been diverted from the M6 where traffic was at a standstill.

3.    I have read Mr [Redacted] detailed submissions and the Council’s response. The Council have not responded to the Traffic Regulation Order exemption point raised by Mr [Redacted] and have not said that the vehicle would have passed other advance warning signage over and above the sign referred to by Mr [Redacted].

4.    I am satisfied that:

a.    The vehicle was lawfully using Corporation Street prior to its entry into the bus gate. There are no weight or height restrictions on that section of highway.

b.    The vehicle’s use of Corporation was unusual and unexpected. The driver could not have been expected to have pre-planned this route into Corporation Street.

c.    The only bus gate advance warning sign the vehicle passed before entering the bus gate was a sign approximately 20m before the entry point advising vehicles to take a sharp left turn to avoid the bus gate into Marsh Lane.

d.    Marsh Lane is narrow and there is a central island just before its entrance. The lorry would not have been able to access Marsh Lane without mounting the central island and possibly damaging adjacent buildings.

e.    There was no alternative for the lorry other than to continue into the bus gate. If it had not done so I agree that an accident was likely to have occurred.

5.    In light of the above findings, Article 8(a) of the Traffic Regulation Order applies, namely;

 "8. Exemptions
Nothing in Article 6 of this Order shall render it unlawful to cause or permit any Vehicle to travel along any part of the lengths of road referred to therein for so long as may be necessary to enable:

a) the Vehicle to avoid an accident;"


6.    Therefore, I allow the appeal."

I did request clarification from the adjudicator on whether they considered the signage sufficient given their findings, and if the appeal would have been allowed without the TRO exemption. I can't remember what they said exactly but it was essentially that the ruling was based on the exemption alone and they don't offer advice lol