Free Traffic Legal Advice

No hard evidence for a defense?? what a crock of sh1t you do not need to evidence a defence the council need to evidence a contravention and i see nowhere on the video any blue sign you failed to contravene

I know they are there in various locations but the council need to evidence that the where visible not obscured by parked vehicles as would be the one at the first junction you can see on the video

couple of cases that support my view


2220932635

There is evidence that the appellant's vehicle drove in a direction contrary to that required by the traffic management order. The vehicle was leaving Hartley Avenue at its junction with Barking Road. The enforcement authority (EA) has provided evidence of signage facing motorists on Barking Road, entering Hartley Avenue informing them that they may only drive straight on and that it is a one-way road. The driver would not, of course, have seen those signs precisely because he was driving the other way. So that evidence is not relevant. There is no evidence of any signs that would have faced the driver informing him that he may not drive in the direction in which he did on Hartley Road, or that he must drive in the opposite direction on that road, at any point on his journey. In the absence of any signage that the driver would actually have seen, or would have had the opportunity of seeing, this contravention is not proved.

2160166049

The Appellant has attended and I find him to be an honest witness I believe what he tells me.

The issue in this appeal is whether the signage at the point of entry the Appellant's vehicle took to the pedestrian zone in Electric Lane was clearly and adequately signed.

I have considered the evidence and watched the CCTV footage a number of times with the Appellant.

The CCTV footage shows the Appellant's vehicle exiting Electric Lane and I have not been able to see the state of the signage at the Appellant's point of entry on 7 February 2016.

I find that the signage was obscured due to works and high sided vehicles and that the Appellant could not see the sign plates indicating the restriction. Such cases are rare; I find that this is one of them.

The appeal is allowed.

Is the contravention going the wrong way down a one way street. NO. The contravention is failing to comply with the arrow on  blue sign. A section 36 contravention, so against the sign not a TMO. So look at the council evidence, What sign?

Yes, I will draft a representation for you. If I have not done so by Sunday please remind me, I have a few things on over the next couple of days

@PMB, Why would there need to be a blue sign in camera shot? It's regular practice for authorities to prove to adjudicators' satisfaction with library pictures that the necessary sign was in situ, they're not required to show the sign in the video.

The video shows clear road markings and a different blue sign and it is irrefutable that the vehicle was travelling the wrong way. IMO, all the authority would need to do is to introduce evidence such as recent library photos or CEO etc. notes to this effect in order to persuade an adjudicator.

Is anyone suggesting that 'the sign' was not in situ? 

I still think that visibility vis a vis its position and lack of complementary road marking(which is in situ at the other exit) could be argued, along with any procedural matters.

The Op does not have to prove anything that is what the council must do for parking an adjudicator can make an assumption on the balance of probability with a moving traffic case like this they must show that at the time of contravention not only was it in situ but visible at the time any other sign but the s36 one is irrelevant

Will do it on Friday reps due 12th of Oct

Dear @Pastmybest,

Thank you! Appreciate it. Hoping to submit by tonight during discount stage.