This council should be hauled over the coals or wasting council tax payers' money.And for wasting the time of the appellant.
Another job for Mr Bird of The Daily Telegraph.
Please show the NOR.
I'd make a very basic representation:Dear Royal Borough of Greenwich,
I challenge liability on the basis that the alleged contravention did not occur, I refer you to my informal representations.
Yours faithfully,
If they reject, we appeal to the tribunal and require them to turn up for the hearing. It is exceptionally unlikely that they'll turn up, so that'll be the end of that.
I see no attachment.You can't see the status on the Greenwich website, it just says the amount due is £130. I'd wait because if they take too long to issue the enforcement notice, then you can challenge based on unfair delay.
Hi Cp8759
Please see attached notice which came today
You can't see the status on the Greenwich website, it just says the amount due is £130. I'd wait because if they take too long to issue the enforcement notice, then you can challenge based on unfair delay.
Personally I'd say carry on. I was meant to have a Greenwich bus lane appeal tomorrow, but the hearing's been cancelled as they haven't produced any evidence at all.
Let us know when you get the enforcement notice.
I agree as they have staffing problems.
as i mentioned that I got 2 letters one dated 3/8/23 and the other 8/8/23 she replied that the my discount period ends on 19th.I'm not sure you mentioned that here?
Post the letter dated 8 August please.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1167140/approved-devices-granted-to-local-authorities.odsBromley now have one effective 9th August.
They do have a new certificate since February. Only Bromley and Hackney do not have. The latter will sort it out shortly: their manufacturer has one but the council doesn't!
The two cases DNCed by members of pepipoo were taken to the Tribunal and Greenwich claimed staff shortage. In fact, they had no certificate at all though their NORs said they did! This story will develop.
I believe that cp is cross-referencing certificates with actual named cameras.
Sorry in a bit of a rush but this will do:Dear Royal Borough of Greenwich,
I contest liability because the alleged contravention did not occur. I have reviewed the video and it does not show my vehicle in a bus lane in the vicinity of Maryon Park, the footage appears to be of some other location. It follows that the contravention alleged on the PCN did not occur.
Yours faithfully,
If there's no further comments in 2 / 3 days, bump the thread and I'll draft something for you.
as i mentioned that I got 2 letters one dated 3/8/23 and the other 8/8/23 she replied that the my discount period ends on 19th.I'm not sure you mentioned that here?
Post the letter dated 8 August please.
as i mentioned that I got 2 letters one dated 3/8/23 and the other 8/8/23 she replied that the my discount period ends on 19th.I'm not sure you mentioned that here?
Post the letter dated 8 August please.
as i mentioned that I got 2 letters one dated 3/8/23 and the other 8/8/23 she replied that the my discount period ends on 19th.I'm not sure you mentioned that here?
Your video shows bus lane signs on the offside, which seems to address the main issue around adequacy.
At this point the camera approval issue might be the strongest point, but we'll have to wait to confirm the make and model of the camera. The fact that the council has a recent certificate is not conclusive, as illustrated in the parking case of Imran Akhtar Ali v London Borough of Redbridge (2230298285, 05 August 2023) (https://drive.google.com/uc?id=1UxaHZVpI32Hu5h0bBjbJ80lbPXmmqsE0&export=inline).
Another angle is that the wrong location is stated on the PCN:, the PCN says Maryon Park but the CCTV camera is on South Lake Roundabout, and the bus lane in question is on the part of Woolwich Road between Charlton Lane and South Lake Roundabout, which is not adjacent to Maryon Park at all.
Give others a couple of days to comment but I'm minded to draft something based on the location issue, and while we wait for the informal rejection I should get confirmation of the camera make and model.
OP--getting the "bus lane closed" photos would be worthwhile.It wouldn't hurt.
If there's no further comments in 2 / 3 days, bump the thread and I'll draft something for you.
(https://youtu.be/96RPEMTmP58)OP--getting the "bus lane closed" photos would be worthwhile.It wouldn't hurt.
OP--getting the "bus lane closed" photos would be worthwhile.It wouldn't hurt.
OP--getting the "bus lane closed" photos would be worthwhile.It wouldn't hurt.
If there's no further comments in 2 / 3 days, bump the thread and I'll draft something for you.
Your video shows bus lane signs on the offside, which seems to address the main issue around adequacy.
At this point the camera approval issue might be the strongest point, but we'll have to wait to confirm the make and model of the camera. The fact that the council has a recent certificate is not conclusive, as illustrated in the parking case of Imran Akhtar Ali v London Borough of Redbridge (2230298285, 05 August 2023) (https://drive.google.com/uc?id=1UxaHZVpI32Hu5h0bBjbJ80lbPXmmqsE0&export=inline).
Another angle is that the wrong location is stated on the PCN:, the PCN says Maryon Park but the CCTV camera is on South Lake Roundabout, and the bus lane in question is on the part of Woolwich Road between Charlton Lane and South Lake Roundabout, which is not adjacent to Maryon Park at all.
Give others a couple of days to comment but I'm minded to draft something based on the location issue, and while we wait for the informal rejection I should get confirmation of the camera make and model.
Agreed, the only sign relating to a bus lane is way back on the roundabout:-
https://goo.gl/maps/MCa11FgoyYY1DEnu7
BUT ---has the signage being changed since August 2021?
The OP will have to get some up to date photos or use a travelcam to prove inadequate signage.
From GSV it is totally inadequate and thereby unenforceable.
Mike
If you look back along the road to the previous bus lane, it has a sign for a bus lane with a bicycle symbol below the bus symbol: -
https://goo.gl/maps/Z43T2nrqMs9izaKL9
But then all you have are Cycle Lane signs
https://goo.gl/maps/tLmzC5Qa29NnRzcF8
and
https://goo.gl/maps/tLmzC5Qa29NnRzcF8
For me, this is extremely poor practice, because bicycles are allowed in the bus lane, so it is very confusing, especially as one can still see the road markings for the cycle lane that was there before the bus lane.See GSV of July 2019 here: -
https://goo.gl/maps/qv6mshWuJAYX2uQ67
It looks like the Highways Department have completely cocked-up the installation of this bus lane.
Correct signage would have the cycle lane signs replaced with bus lane signs with a symbol of a bicycle below the bus symbol.
The other aspect is that it was recently discovered that none of the London bus lane cameras complied with the law, not being approved by the Secretary of State, and a lot of appeals were won at London Tribunals. However, as you can imagine with the potential loss of lots of lovely dosh, there has been a mad dash by London councils to get them approved. However, whether this one that they used to whallop you with is so certified, I'm not sure. Somebody on here may know. If it isn't it is a slam-dunk win at London Tribunals.
However, are you prepared to take them to London Tribunals ? It is a double-or-quits gamble because you lose the discount option.