Author Topic: Harrow, code 33E using a restricted route, Headstone Lane  (Read 1688 times)

0 Members and 44 Guests are viewing this topic.

Harrow, code 33E using a restricted route, Headstone Lane
« on: »
Good morning,

Long shot but wondering if anyone cane help. My wife received a PCN from Harrow Council regarding passing through a bus gate. I have attached a copy of the front of PCN for information.

I have seen that there have been previous posts on this, however from looking at signage it looks like there have been improvements to the signage.

The other point to consider is that the contravention occurred on the 27th July, however we did not receive the PCN until the 10th August which is the 14th day after the contravention, although the PCN is dated the 7th August. I thought that you need to receive the PCN within 14 days of the contravention but I may be wrong on this.

The other point I noticed is that while the sign states the middle bus gate is restricted to the use by buses, cycles and taxis only, the road-markings only state buses?

Any thoughts on whether I would stand a chance on a successful appeal and the basis of such?

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


Re: Harrow, code 33E using a restricted route, Headstone Lane
« Reply #1 on: »
Quote
The other point to consider is that the contravention occurred on the 27th July, however we did not receive the PCN until the 10th August which is the 14th day after the contravention, although the PCN is dated the 7th August. I thought that you need to receive the PCN within 14 days of the contravention but I may be wrong on this.
Sorry to tell you, but you're wrong. They have 28 days from contravention date.

Quote
Any thoughts on whether I would stand a chance on a successful appeal and the basis of such?
So far it doesn't look hopeful from your narrative, but whether there is a good appeal argument can only be known when we have seen the video, the sole evidence of the alleged contravention.  SO please post it here. One or two people on here can get it for you if you give them the PCN Number and vehicle reg number. Doesn't the PCN tell you how to see it ?

Re: Harrow, code 33E using a restricted route, Headstone Lane
« Reply #2 on: »
Quote
The other point to consider is that the contravention occurred on the 27th July, however we did not receive the PCN until the 10th August which is the 14th day after the contravention, although the PCN is dated the 7th August. I thought that you need to receive the PCN within 14 days of the contravention but I may be wrong on this.
Sorry to tell you, but you're wrong. They have 28 days from contravention date.

Ok noted thanks, sorry must have mis read something.

Quote
Any thoughts on whether I would stand a chance on a successful appeal and the basis of such?
So far it doesn't look hopeful from your narrative, but whether there is a good appeal argument can only be known when we have seen the video, the sole evidence of the alleged contravention.  SO please post it here. One or two people on here can get it for you if you give them the PCN Number and vehicle reg number. Doesn't the PCN tell you how to see it ?

The PCN states that I can see additional images from the Harrow website but nothing about video evidence? Looking at their evidence, this needs to be requested and they will send by post. So have requested this now. I will post the additional images but don't think they help much.

Re: Harrow, code 33E using a restricted route, Headstone Lane
« Reply #3 on: »
Furtehr to my earlier post, here are the other images from the Harrow website. [ Guests cannot view attachments ] [ Guests cannot view attachments ] [ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Re: Harrow, code 33E using a restricted route, Headstone Lane
« Reply #4 on: »
Hm, looks pretty damning to me ! Why on earth did your wife ignore the correct route and go through the bus gate ?  Only thing the video does not show are the signs on the approach. Please post a GSV link that shows them, (assuming GSV is up-to-date).

Re: Harrow, code 33E using a restricted route, Headstone Lane
« Reply #5 on: »
Hm, looks pretty damning to me ! Why on earth did your wife ignore the correct route and go through the bus gate ?  Only thing the video does not show are the signs on the approach. Please post a GSV link that shows them, (assuming GSV is up-to-date).

I've already had the discussion as to why you would go through the bus gate when its marked as such!

Link for streetview as per below, but shows both bus restriction signs in place. Clutching at straws here but as part of the evidence do they not need to show at the time the signs were in place? So a picture from the side that entry was made into the bus gate. I must admit that their picture does show the back of the signs but you can't see the signs themselves?

https://goo.gl/maps/QQp6Ygm432H1YDS19

Also can I ask how did you review the video evidence, I have just requested this?
« Last Edit: August 20, 2023, 01:03:42 pm by cp8759 »

Re: Harrow, code 33E using a restricted route, Headstone Lane
« Reply #6 on: »
Quote
The other point to consider is that the contravention occurred on the 27th July, however we did not receive the PCN until the 10th August which is the 14th day after the contravention, although the PCN is dated the 7th August. I thought that you need to receive the PCN within 14 days of the contravention but I may be wrong on this.
Sorry to tell you, but you're wrong. They have 28 days from contravention date.

Ok noted thanks, sorry must have mis read something.

Quote
Any thoughts on whether I would stand a chance on a successful appeal and the basis of such?
So far it doesn't look hopeful from your narrative, but whether there is a good appeal argument can only be known when we have seen the video, the sole evidence of the alleged contravention.  SO please post it here. One or two people on here can get it for you if you give them the PCN Number and vehicle reg number. Doesn't the PCN tell you how to see it ?

The PCN states that I can see additional images from the Harrow website but nothing about video evidence? Looking at their evidence, this needs to be requested and they will send by post. So have requested this now. I will post the additional images but don't think they help much.

I have the video footage now, how can I attach as file will exceed the allowable limit?

Re: Harrow, code 33E using a restricted route, Headstone Lane
« Reply #7 on: »
The video shows the vehicle driving through the bus gate but as per my earlier point, you can not see the signs facing towards the driver, similar to the photos. You can see that signs are in place as you can see the backs of them but you can not see the sign face itself. Long shot but could you argue that the contravention did not occur as there was no signage and let them prove that the signs were in place?

Not sure if they have cameras on the opposite side which would show the signage and I assume if they highlight these then my penalty may well double and I may not have the option to pay the reduced half price of £65.

Re: Harrow, code 33E using a restricted route, Headstone Lane
« Reply #8 on: »
Whilst you can use this argument, (video doesn't show the signs that were passed), they will reject your reps and say the signs are all present and correct. you would have to then take them to London Tribunals with the full PCN penalty in play. The council will then present library photos together with a witness statement that they are present at the location. An adjudicator decides cases using the civil law test of "on the balance of probabilities". To be frank, I cannot see any credible appeal argument, and the discount looks your best option.

Re: Harrow, code 33E using a restricted route, Headstone Lane
« Reply #9 on: »
Whilst you can use this argument, (video doesn't show the signs that were passed), they will reject your reps and say the signs are all present and correct. you would have to then take them to London Tribunals with the full PCN penalty in play. The council will then present library photos together with a witness statement that they are present at the location. An adjudicator decides cases using the civil law test of "on the balance of probabilities". To be frank, I cannot see any credible appeal argument, and the discount looks your best option.

Fair point and deep down I think I knew I'd have to pay. Will just pay the discounted amount.

Can I ask how you accessed the video though?

Re: Harrow, code 33E using a restricted route, Headstone Lane
« Reply #10 on: »
Fair point and deep down I think I knew I'd have to pay. Will just pay the discounted amount.
That's very unfortunate, because there was a viable route to challenge this.

The PCN spreadsheet tells you that a known flaw of Harrow's PCN process is that mitigation is not considered for some contraventions, and indeed their Mitigation consideration 2017 V1 document says for code 33 "No mitigation considered", so getting them for a failure to consider would have been easy.

Can all members please remember not to give advice without checking the spreadsheet first, there are far too many known flaws for anyone to keep all that information in their head, that's why we have a spreadsheet.
I practice law in the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, London Tribunals, the First-tier tribunal for Scotland, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for Northern Ireland, but I am not a solicitor or a barrister. Notwithstanding this, I voluntarily apply the cab rank rule. I am a member of the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends, my membership number is FM193 and I abide by the SPMF service standards.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order

Re: Harrow, code 33E using a restricted route, Headstone Lane
« Reply #11 on: »
Fair point and deep down I think I knew I'd have to pay. Will just pay the discounted amount.
That's very unfortunate, because there was a viable route to challenge this.

The PCN spreadsheet tells you that a known flaw of Harrow's PCN process is that mitigation is not considered for some contraventions, and indeed their Mitigation consideration 2017 V1 document says for code 33 "No mitigation considered", so getting them for a failure to consider would have been easy.

Can all members please remember not to give advice without checking the spreadsheet first, there are far too many known flaws for anyone to keep all that information in their head, that's why we have a spreadsheet.

Hi thank you for your response. I only paid the fine yesterday as well!

I've had a look at both documents referenced to but can you just explain what you mean by "No mitigation considered"? Would just be good to know this. Are you suggesting that the appeal is on the basis that you can't see the signs in the direction in which the contravention occurred?

Re: Harrow, code 33E using a restricted route, Headstone Lane
« Reply #12 on: »
Are you suggesting that the appeal is on the basis that you can't see the signs in the direction in which the contravention occurred?
By law the council must consider any representations you put forward, including mitigation. If you made representations based purely on mitigation, and they rejected, you could appeal to the tribunal on the basis that they have unlawfully failed to consider your representations, because their policy document says they won't consider mitigation for this contravention.
I practice law in the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, London Tribunals, the First-tier tribunal for Scotland, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for Northern Ireland, but I am not a solicitor or a barrister. Notwithstanding this, I voluntarily apply the cab rank rule. I am a member of the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends, my membership number is FM193 and I abide by the SPMF service standards.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order

Re: Harrow, code 33E using a restricted route, Headstone Lane
« Reply #13 on: »
Are you suggesting that the appeal is on the basis that you can't see the signs in the direction in which the contravention occurred?
By law the council must consider any representations you put forward, including mitigation. If you made representations based purely on mitigation, and they rejected, you could appeal to the tribunal on the basis that they have unlawfully failed to consider your representations, because their policy document says they won't consider mitigation for this contravention.

Sorry, are you suggesting that the council doesn't consider mitigation even though this is required by law? Why do they do that, as they would lose on this basis if it went to the adjudicator surely?

Can I just clarify what mitigation I would be proposing? I didn't think the evidence not showing the signs would be seen as mitigation?

Re: Harrow, code 33E using a restricted route, Headstone Lane
« Reply #14 on: »
Sorry, are you suggesting that the council doesn't consider mitigation even though this is required by law? Why do they do that, as they would lose on this basis if it went to the adjudicator surely?
Please read page 22 of this document. As for why, councils do all sorts of stupid things, we don't worry about why they do stupid things, we're busy enough as it is.

Can I just clarify what mitigation I would be proposing? I didn't think the evidence not showing the signs would be seen as mitigation?
If you've paid the PCN it's too late anyway, so this is all academic.
I practice law in the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, London Tribunals, the First-tier tribunal for Scotland, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for Northern Ireland, but I am not a solicitor or a barrister. Notwithstanding this, I voluntarily apply the cab rank rule. I am a member of the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends, my membership number is FM193 and I abide by the SPMF service standards.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order