Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: Rackett78 on May 12, 2025, 09:42:26 pm
-
No, I do mean 953, they have put a small roundel below the green light on the signal head of the pedestrian crossing within the L/H filter lane, It does not comply with the TSRGD size requirement of at least 450mm. Hence why no driver can see it properly until they are upon it
-
Non-prescribed signage? 953? Do you mean 959B?
-
Right. I have edited, added to and re-submitted my representations. See below. Apologies for not posting before submitting but the apparent 28 days of the enforcement notice expires shortly. I've also attached the screenshot of the Lambeth Website.
Thanks again. Will keep you posted on their response!
Representations:
There was no breach of the order and I challenge liability for this PCN for the following reasons:
1. The video evidence does not show any upright signage allegedly passed and therefore does not prove the alleged contravention
2. According to Article 4(2) of the applicable Traffic Management Order (TMO) the controls specified in Article 3(1) do not apply in respect of a vehicle crossing a bus lane to get to or from any road adjacent to the bus lane. At the time of the alleged contravention the vehicle KU17HJM moved to access the adjacent road on Clapham Park Road solely for the purpose of turning left at the junction with Abbeville Road/Acre Lane. This manoeuvre was legal under the terms of the TMO, the Bus Lane was not entered in contravention of the TMO as the adjacent road was to be accessed by the Vehicle KU17HJM.
3. The adjacent road referenced in point 2 is the nearside left hand filter lane characterised by the short stretch to the Stop Line diagram 1001 between the nearside kerb and traffic island, the signal controlled pedestrian crossing, Give-way triangular road marking and Double Broken white line at the subsequent left hand turn junction with Abbeville road/Acre Lane and does not state or carry valid upright signage or road markings denoting that it is a Bus Lane.
4. In reference to point 3, the diagram 1049A marking denoting the boundary of the nearside with-flow Bus Lane ends just before the traffic island. As per the Traffic Signs Manual Chapter 3 article 9.3.9 “the end of a with-flow bus lane will usually be obvious through the termination of the diagram 1049A marking.”
5. The diagram 964 “End of Bus Lane” is neither visible from Clapham Park Road itself nor in line with the end of the diagram 1049A marking termination as mandated by the Traffic Signs Manual when it is being used.
6. In reference to points 3 and 4, the diagram 1048 is beyond the diagram 1049A marking termination and is therefore invalid.
7. The diagram 953 is not visible until the driver has already committed to the nearside left hand filter road exit and become trapped between the nearside kerb and traffic island. The driver is beyond the point of no return otherwise a dangerous reversing manoeuvre would be required.
8. In reference to point 7, the diagram 953 does not meet the TSRGD 2016 regulation of signage size which states the minimum is 450mm. The diagram 953 is not compatible with a Traffic Signal Head and thus is not prescribed in its current setting at Clapham Park Road.
9. The signal controlled pedestrian crossing within the nearside left hand filter lane is inappropriately signed in lacking the Zig-Zag and Termination marks mandated by the Traffic Sign Manual Chapter 6. Presumably this has been wilfully omitted by Lambeth Council as they recognise that these markings would be mutually incompatible with their alleged Bus Lane or apparent efforts to define a Bus Gate using the non-prescribed diagram 953 on the traffic signal head at this location.
10. There is a left-turn arrow road marking (diagram 1038) just prior to the traffic island that guides drivers into the nearside left hand filter lane / adjacent road (detailed in points 2 and 3) at a point where it is visible to the driver that the nearside Bus Lane is ending (due to termination of the diagram 1049A) and thus the manoeuvre to turn into the filter lane is deemed permissible by the driver. In reference to point 7, the non-prescribed diagram 953 is not visible from the diagram 1038 left-turn arrow to contradict the driver’s opinion of this permissible manoeuvre.
11. The alleged contravention is de minimis, the manoeuvre of the vehicle evidenced by the video did not undermine the Bus Lane or obstruct or interfere with any Bus Lane traffic, traffic on Clapham Park Road or Abbeville/Acre Lane or Pedestrians and Cyclists.
12. Overall the layout at Clapham Park Road to Abbeville Road/Acre Lane is inadequate and confused with conflated, missing and non-prescribed upright signage and road markings that only serves to entrap drivers into the nearside left hand filter lane that Lambeth Council alleges is a Bus Lane to justify their issuance of PCNs for the purposes of significant revenue generation at this location from unwitting drivers who merely pay without raising discord.
Please cancel this PCN in light of the above
-
Please do not even mention their first letter - this can wait. And please screenshot the payments page now and keep and post it here.
-
I doubt the signage has changed since this time.
You can check - GSV has a capture for this July and every July or August since 2019 (not 2020)
-
Great. I will re-submit the above on their "Formal Representations" webpage.
A few additional comments I'd appreciate your thoughts on in efforts to further bolster my repeat representations:
1) Do you think it is worthwhile also adding a case precedent to the representations where the PCN was quashed by London Tribunals on appeal due to inadequate signage? I don't have all the details (Case numbers etc) but it appears this case hit the local news in 2022: https://www.wandsworthguardian.co.uk/news/22454972.man-wins-fight-lambeth-council-bus-lane-fine/. I doubt the signage has changed since this time.
2) In the rejection notice they state "the lane ends after the traffic light signal at the Give way markings, outside 149 Clapham Park Road where a sign (TSRGD diagram 964) has been erected". However on reviewing the Traffic Sign manual, article 9.3.9 states "the end of a with-flow bus lane will usually be obvious through the termination of the diagram 1049A marking...". In this case the 1049A marking ends at the traffic island as previously stated. The 964 sign is not in line with the 1049A termination as it should be based on my reading of the Traffic Signs manual.
3) In addition, the rejection notice seems to conflate this layout as being perhaps both a Bus Lane and then a Bus Gate? Is this allowed? The second 1048 "Bus Lane" road marking is also beyond the end of the 1049A line and thus within their proposed Bus "Gate".
Ultimately, the whole layout stinks and seems like one hell of a money maker for LBC since its introduction leading drivers down the left filter lane
-
Nope. I would just require them to consider your original challenge as formal representations, which you can do online. Do not mention their initial rejection though.
-
Is that in itself a grounds for cancellation?
-
1. The EN tells you to use the form and then contradicts itself by telling you to go online.
-
Hi
I have now received the enforcement notice - uploaded
I have also attached the screenshots of the Lambeth Payment Website at the various stages
1 - Pre informal challenge
2 - Post notice of rejection
3 - Post enforcement notice letter
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Thanks
Have done so
Will post back when the EN arrives
-
Yes to the EN. meantime, take screenshots of payment status as this will be crucial at the final set.
-
As expected the informal challenge was rejected
I have attached the letter
Presumably I wait for the enforcement notice now
Thanks
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Okay.
-
A Draft. Any comments/corrections/additions/thoughts welcome:
I believe there was no breach of the order and challenge liability for this PCN for the following reasons:
1. The video evidence does not show any upright signage allegedly passed and therefore does not prove the alleged contravention
2. According to Article 4(2) of the applicable Traffic Management Order (TMO) the controls specified in Article 3(1) do not apply in respect of a vehicle crossing a bus lane to get to or from any road adjacent to the bus lane. At the time of the alleged contravention the vehicle moved to access the adjacent road on Clapham Park Road solely for the purpose of turning left at the junction with Abbeville Road. This manoeuvre was legal under the terms of the TMO, the Bus Lane was not entered in contravention of the TMO as the adjacent road was to be accessed by the Vehicle.
3. This adjacent road referenced in point 2 is characterised by the Pedestrian Crossing, Give-way triangular road marking and Double Broken white line at the subsequent left hand turn junction with Abbeville road and does not state or carry appropriate signage or road markings that it is a Bus Lane.
4. In reference to point 3, The boundary denoting the nearside Bus Lane ends at the traffic island.
5. The alleged contravention is de minimis, the manoeuvre of the vehicle did not undermine the Bus Lane or obstruct or interfere with any Bus Lane traffic
-
Why not? Post up a draft first please.
-
Thanks for the input
Presumably this will get rejected out of hand with subsequent links from the council to the signage.
With this in mind, do you think I should add in my TMO comments where the drive was "moving to adjacent road" now or hold fire on that for now?
Thanks
-
Morning, following up on an opinion / draft for grounds of challenge - the deadline to make representations and maintain the discount is tomorrow.
Thanks again!
The law only allows an informal challenge. I suggest this:
I challenge liability for tis PCN because the video does not show any upright signage allegedly passed and therefore does not prove the alleged contravention. Therefore, please cancel
****
We can leave the website issues for later.
-
Morning, following up on an opinion / draft for grounds of challenge - the deadline to make representations and maintain the discount is tomorrow.
Thanks again!
-
I am doing a Lambeth one for another member but privately. This will be fun as their website is total bolleaux. I will look at the case later and offer a draft.
-
Hi all,
I've been sent a PCN (links below) regarding an alleged contravention at the notorious Clapham Park Road / Abbeville Road | Acre Lane Bus Lane Priority filter where it turns left. Like many, the driver believed this was the lane to turn left at the junction.
These are the links of the signage leading up to the junction and the road layout itself - although the road markings are a little faded now:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/GxSYvPym3Eg4FpTPA
https://maps.app.goo.gl/7WHsUBfzCpE2rmzA8
https://maps.app.goo.gl/2LRBpsLcmd3tFugj6
https://maps.app.goo.gl/szniGphaGydE64QCA
https://maps.app.goo.gl/Kw7PXuCa3UNgZo5B8
There is a large white arrow pointing left in the lane adjacent to the Bus Lane before the traffic island, this arrow is thus misleading directing drivers into the bus lane rather than to turn left after the traffic island as the council intends.
Clearly this Bus Lane has been a money spinner for Lambeth since its introduction - apparently the most lucrative across the country!
I was reviewing the Traffic Management Order from 2004 (link below) for this Bus Priority Lane - I am not sure if there are any more recent updates, would appreciate you thoughts on challenging that the Contravention did not occur based on Article 4(2) in the TMO - i.e. the vehicle is exempt as it crossed into the bus lane to "get to or from any road adjacent to the bus lane" - From the images of the bus lane it seems to end at the pedestrian crossing, whether this counts as "road adjacent" or Acre Lane itself?
In addition, I have uploaded a screenshot of the Lambeth PCN Payment website - the date of increase from the discount of £80 to £160 does not match the 14-day expiring period - is this ground for cancelling the PCN?
Any assistance in challenging this would be much appreciated, thanks
Link to PCN document and Evidence:
https://imgur.com/a/pcn-clapham-park-road-TjSV2Cs
Link to Screenshot of Lambeth PCN Payment Website:
https://imgur.com/a/gPLvmmW
Link to Lambeth Borough Council Traffic Management Order 2004:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/pcns_bus_lane_clapham_park_roada_4/response/388117/attach/11/LBC%202004%20No%2041%20The%20Lambeth%20Bus%20Priority%20Clapham%20Park%20Road%20Traffic%20Order%202004.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1