Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hello,

I recently received a PCN (Penalty Charge Notice) due to a contravention (number 34) for allegedly being in a bus lane. The incident occurred while I was driving along Whipps Cross Road E11. As I approached the end of the bus lane, I needed to switch to the left lane in order to exit at the roundabout traffic lights. Regrettably, I began the manoeuvre a bit early and crossed the bus lane but there was no bus behind me. I want to emphasize that my intention was solely to merge into the correct lane and not to undertake any cars or disrupt traffic flow.

I am looking to contest this PCN on the aforementioned basis and would greatly appreciate any advice on how to structure my challenge effectively. While researching previous appeals made at this location, I came across references to 'approved devices' and succeeding, however my concern is if they have a new certificate or if this camera is still non-compliant to issue penalties.

Location: https://goo.gl/maps/ThZCPK5m9pdLo4ju9

https://walthamforestecho.co.uk/2022/08/03/waltham-forest-drivers-escape-fines-thanks-to-stranger-wielding-little-known-law/#article

Thank you for your assistance and understanding. Looking forward to your response.

Best regards,
ST

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Hi cp8759, thanks for replying.

Please see attached PCN number and plate details.

Would you be so kind to share strongly worded template for appealing. As the alleged incursion was de minimis, does that stand a chance at all?

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

I have drafted below with the help of Schofeldt in PePiPoo forum to appeal:

Dear Sirs

Ref: PCN: FR60075661  VRM: EN59RHY

I challenge the said PCN on the following grounds:

1. The contravention did not occur as I merely attempted to merge into the exit lane to turn left thus creating a situation which can only be described as de minimis. There is a 20 metre rule that should normally be observed before any PCN should be issued and in this case the vehicle clearly was not driven in the bus lane for this distance. In this case the appellant simply made a permitted left turn across a bus lane for no more than 10 metres before turning left at the roundabout.

2. The video does not show any signs allegedly passed.

3. There is a break in the solid white line which is confusing.

4. The photographs provided are more helpful in relation to where the vehicle crossed over and the arrow indicating vehicles could enter the lane. This is clearly almost immediately after the vehicle crossed over. No end sign can be observed in those pictures.

4. I put you to strict proof that the camera used satisfies the admissibility of evidence at the Tribunal as provided at Para 7(2) of Schedule 1 of The London Local Authorities Act 1996 (as amended) and Part II (**I will wait for your confirmation on this one**)

Further to this please see previous appeals for this contravention which were upheld in favour of the appellant.
Ashfaq Ahmad Chaudhry v London Borough of Merton (2130253836, 11 July 2013) and
Sarah-Jane Mendonca v London Borough of Waltham Forest (2210480049, 06 September 2021).

Please cancel the PCN, particularly also as this is the first time I have received such a PCN.

Yours faithfully,
ST

There is also no 20 metre rule. 

At one time the TPT used such a figure, but there is nothing in the legislation or regulations, it is up to individual adjudicators whether to consider a de minimis argument or not. As far as I know, London Tribunals and before them, PATAS, never mentioned any rule.  De minimis is subjective, so one adjudicator may well disagree with another. 

There is also no 20 metre rule. 

At one time the TPT used such a figure, but there is nothing in the legislation or regulations, it is up to individual adjudicators whether to consider a de minimis argument or not. As far as I know, London Tribunals and before them, PATAS, never mentioned any rule.  De minimis is subjective, so one adjudicator may well disagree with another.

20 metre rule argument was used in this case, I thought that might have some importance, but if that is going to be detrimental, happy to remove it.

Sarah-Jane Mendonca v London Borough of Waltham Forest (2210480049, 06 September 2021)

Quote from: Incandescent on July 31, 2023, 11:28:08 am

There is also no 20 metre rule. 

At one time the TPT used such a figure, but there is nothing in the legislation or regulations, it is up to individual adjudicators whether to consider a de minimis argument or not. As far as I know, London Tribunals and before them, PATAS, never mentioned any rule.  De minimis is subjective, so one adjudicator may well disagree with another.

20 metre rule argument was used in this case, I thought that might have some importance, but if that is going to be detrimental, happy to remove it.

Sarah-Jane Mendonca v London Borough of Waltham Forest (2210480049, 06 September 2021)

Thanks for putting up this link. So there are people around who consider there IS a 20 metre rule, but it is nowhere to be seen in any of the legislation or regulations. The key line of the decision is this: -

"There is a 20 metre rule that should normally be observed before any PCN should be issued"

Well, this is the first time I suspect any council has heard about this so called rule ! Interesting, though,  because it can be quoted to support trivial (de minimis) intrusions into bus lanes.

The only consistent thing about Adjudicators is their inconsistency.

Some believe in the mythical 20m rule and at least one thought the 'End of Bus Lane' sign was mandatory.

On that basis I'd try all options in the hope something might stick and go for lucky dip on which adjudicator you get.

The lack of maintenance on the bus lane is so annoying. That gap in the 'continuous thick white line' has got bigger in the past few years.

They rake in at least £1m per year from this 183m long, pointless bus lane but they can't afford a lick of paint to make it fully compliant.

The context and layout of the junction is impossible to derive from the photos and video. You need (IMO) to be in the left hand lane for all the exits expect southbound A12.

The OP has entered the bus lane 12m-13m from the end. As is usual there's no bus to be seen. OP concentrating on traffic and lights 50m ahead and needs to be in LH lane.

There is no end of bus lane sign. It should have one because of driver behaviour. Those getting tickets invariably clip the last few metres and need additional clarity.

End of bus lane not clear to to ever growing gap, currently estimated between 1m - 1.5m. The meaning of 'Substantially compliant' is being stretched. How long does it need to be before it is non-compliant?

Yeah I hate this bus lane with a vengeance   

Ah! I already appealed with below, lets see what I hear back from them.

Dear Sirs

Ref: PCN: FR60075661  VRM: EN59RHY

I challenge the said PCN on the following grounds:

1. The contravention did not occur as I merely attempted to merge into the exit lane to turn left thus creating a situation which can only be described as de minimis. There is a 20 metre rule that should normally be observed before any PCN should be issued and in this case the vehicle clearly was not driven in the bus lane for this distance. In this case the appellant simply made a permitted left turn across a bus lane for no more than 10 metres before turning left at the roundabout.

2. The video does not show any signs allegedly passed.

3. There is a break in the solid white line which is confusing.

4. The photographs provided are more helpful in relation to where the vehicle crossed over and the arrow indicating vehicles could enter the lane. This is clearly almost immediately after the vehicle crossed over. No end sign can be observed in those pictures.

4. I put you to strict proof that the camera used satisfies the admissibility of evidence at the Tribunal as provided at Para 7(2) of Schedule 1 of The London Local Authorities Act 1996 (as amended) and Part II.

Please cancel the PCN, particularly also as this is the first time I have received such a PCN.