Free Traffic Legal Advice

Granted, my interpretation of solid white lines may be a little "extreme" - let's forget about that one.

With regard to the signage, the pic shows the Start of Bus Lane sign & we've already established the End of Bus Lane one exists, but here it is again. As it's one continuous Bus Lane with no breaks for side roads etc there is no need for extra signage along the Lane, particularly as it's only 130m long.


Start: https://ibb.co/3SSWZVq (with usage conditions)
End: https://ibb.co/X78sjgT

(Edited as I was having trouble niserting the pics)

I appreciate the viewpoint and I guess it's vital that there's a bit of a different interpretation in this forums to ensure people stay level headed, I guess, but I think it's best to always side with whatever is logical and if it's a fair on the driver.

For example, the first and only sign which indicates the restrictions is right next to the traffic lights, when I think it should be a further past the lights and closer to the start of the bus lane. When turning from Webber Row, you basically have a split second to see the sign and if you've ever drive around in a city you know there's hazards and things that drivers easily can miss due to distractions and the lack of a second sign is not fair, especially if you missed the first one, in my opinion.

The bus lane signage at the beginning & end of that stretch look fine & the legend "BUS LANE" is painted on the road twice, so I don't see any technicality to get out of it.

Also you've potentially transgressed further by crossing a solid white line.

Let's be honest here - it wasn't about you "keeping the traffic flowing", it was impatience on your behalf. I'm all for challenging the system and the jumped-up CEOs that think they're so important, but for this one I'd say "Just take it on the chin and don't do it again".

It wasn't "impatience" as you put. I have a habit of making sure I am in the correct lane in advance and I live local, in fact many years and use the road regularly yet never went on the bus lane, seeing the lane empty where the end of bus lane sign is I try to use bus lanes accordingly. I saw a queue of cars and the left lane empty apart from one car next to the light and as I pre-emptively move onto the left when I see the sign I did so a bit too early on this occasion.

I hate to see bureaucracy beat common sense. If they all want to turn right or go straight, and I want to go left, I find it really hard to just "take it on the chin" for rules that put you in line, ironically. The lights change fast and they all tend to go towards Elephant & Castle so as I am going left it's very silly to get stuck in the queue and not just move over the bus lane. It's a similar situation to move around a vehicle blocking the single lane road. People shouldn't get tickets for just having common sense.

Also you've potentially transgressed further by crossing a solid white line.

What do you mean?

Quote from: Hippocrates on December 29, 2024, 11:04:40 am

I would go with the signage and light. Also, say there is no signage shown in the video allegedly passed. And put them to strict proof the camera is approved.

Sorry, no issues with the PCN.

The last ground contains in brackets irrelevant and confusing information.

Re send citing this as well, plus no signage allegedly passed, plus proof of camera certification.

Not sure what you're mean to be honest. Which ground do you mean?

EDIT: Oh and I also recieved this email this morning, the attachment is exactly the above letter:

Well, you need to get that impression out of your head pronto, because there is no such allowance, other than claiming "de minimis" at the adjudicators, who may well not agree with you. In fact some adjudicator don't recognise "de minimis" at all.

For so many years I've been assuming there's a little leeway.. See here, specifically 1.15:

Eops Schedule 2 (SoR) Appendix 9 TfL Business Rules
https://content.tfl.gov.uk/eops-schedule2-appendix9-tfl-business-rules.pdf

"A representation is made on the basis that the driver had to temporarily drive in a bus lane, in order that they could turn left to access a side road or driveway."

"if distance within the Bus Lane is less than 20 metres, accept."

A look at GSV compared to the photos shows you were in the bus lane for about 40 metres, way over any possible "de minimis" argument, sorry to have to say it. So the contravention is made out, I'm afraid.

Thanks for your honesty, although wouldn't say 40 metres, if I remember correctly about 4 cars. Getting a fine because all the vehicles in front of you want to go ahead and you want to turn left thus keep the traffic flowing.. This is going to make me question the next time I go into a bus lane only to move around a vehicle when they're turning into a side road. I've seen people do this and it's quite woeful.

However, this may not be game over, because experts on here have found many "technical" appeal arguments based on poor management by the council, (or TfL),  of the enforcement process, so wait a bit for more contributions.

Anyway I can confirm or check if this is the case? Also would the lack of a blue sign near the middle be a case to go on as it is a bit long, because mistakenly as it was dark part of me at the time thought it was way passed the usual time a bus lane is operational.

I also turned from Webber Row (opposite side) so many things to look for when turning and that sign I did not see. I've been at this road before and wondered why there wasn't a sign.

See - Case 5 –  Inadequate signage

Adjudicators decisions and case studies for a bus lane PCN
https://penaltychargenotice.co.uk/bus-lanes/adjudicators-decisions-and-case-studies-bus-lanes/

The post here seems like a sign existed before.

Hi @cp8759, can you advise me on what to do next?

Looking for emails to try, a few weeks ago I emailed RedRoutes@tflenforcement.com and CCCorrespondence@Tfl.gov.uk, but have received no response. As it's the weekend I will try and call tomorrow redroutes tfl phone line listed on here https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/red-routes/penalty-charge-notices?cid=redroutespcn and see what they have to say.

However I'd like to contact ZipCar and tell them to start contacting TFL regarding this as their last letter indicated that they did.

I am at a loss of what options I have.

A few weeks ago I received a letter from TFL.



Oddly I did include the authorization letter that they provided me.

@cp8759, @H C Andersen

I am at a loss now, it's been more than 14 days. I am wondering what my options are. I either wait for them to give authorization, they reject the appeal and then what?

I am thinking I should post in the ZipCar support ticket, asking for an update or rather the fact they caused this mess, they deal with it?

Thanks, I was previously unable to challenge the PCN on the TFL page, but after trying again now it seems to work and not given an error like last time, so I'll proceed.

I have the option of selecting whether I am the registered keeper or not, which then asks what my relationship is to the registered keeper, which I'll write "Hirer". I'll attach the authorization letter they provided. I'm then met with the option to choose:



Correct me if I am mistaken, but I select "Any mitigating circumstances you wish to raise"? Please feel free to adjust/correct, but so far I've got:

To Whom It May Concern,

Please find attached an authorization letter by Avis Budget UK/ZipCar giving me authority to appeal this PCN to TFL. I understand that payment has been already made without any appeal, however I would kindly like to request that this representation is considered after explaining the situation and the mitigating circumstances that occurred.

On the 31/05/24 I rented a car with ZipCar and we had a toddler on board that suddenly became unwell and continued to cry for over 20 minutes without pause. Having difficulty understanding what the issue was, I was informed that we were required to stop and in need of and to find a pharmacy and a toilet. There seems to be no pay and display on this road and a long stretch of empty loading spaces that was within time of loading. Being unfamiliar with the area we located a Boots nearby and I saw a McDonnel's for our unwell child to go to a rest room so felt this was the best option. Just before my partner exiting the vehicle, finally getting a response and being able to communicate with our child, having confirmation toilet is not needed my partner opted to go to the Boots instead further. Feeling under stress I stopped, believing this was a situation that required fast unloading and a loading spot seemed appropriate. Being able to stop and use my phone I was then able to locate a left turn and also a petrol station closer to the boots, however after calling my partner and receiving no answer I was forced to stay in the bay further until they returned. This all happened without properly considering all factors and options.

I would kindly request that considering the circumstances a one of consideration is made which I can then forward to the hire company to proceed with.

Kind regards

Savas

Would kindly appreciate any suggestions/corrections or something I've missed out on the above?

What's your standing as a customer e.g. regular, first time?

I would not quite say a regular, maybe now and again. If they decide to terminate my account I wouldn't miss them to be honest, I would say their loss.

@Savas as far as the zipcar case on pepipoo goes, we never heard back from the OP. We've actually never found anyone who could be bothered to sue the hire company, which is mostly why they get away with this nonsense.

Thank you kindly for the draft, I've changed some parts as I feel their support team do seem to be alright normally so hoping for a easier outcome. I don't know a thing about sueing or proceeding with court proceedings so if you're willing to guide me or providing assistance, I could give it a go, if you believe I have a case.

P.S. The notification email keeps going in my junk so I can't see posts till I check from time to time.

Is this edit OK?

Dear Zipcar,

Letter before action

I note you state that:

"The right to appeal, or transfer liability, on any traffic or parking charge issued by any authority or body belongs to Zipcar and will be at Zipcar's absolute discretion"

With respect, this is not the case and any terms and conditions which purport to give Zipcar such absolute rights are unfair and invalid. The Consumer Rights Act 2015 provides a list of unfair terms in Part 2 of Schedule 1, and paragraph 20 of that schedule at https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/schedule/2/paragraph/20 provides as follows:


A term which has the object or effect of excluding or hindering the consumer's right to take legal action or exercise any other legal remedy, in particular by—

(a) requiring the consumer to take disputes exclusively to arbitration not covered by legal provisions,
(b) unduly restricting the evidence available to the consumer, or
(c) imposing on the consumer a burden of proof which, according to the applicable law, should lie with another party to the contract.

Section 62(1) of the Act provides that "An unfair term of a consumer contract is not binding on the consumer", therefore as your purported term has the effect of excluding my right to appeal the penalty charge to the independent tribunal, the term is unfair and invalid under the Act. An Act of Parliament takes precedence over your terms and conditions.

You also say that "This charge has been issued correctly, thus we are unable to refund it", but again with respect this is not your decision to make, nor is it a decision for the issuing authority. Only London Tribunals has the authority to decide whether a penalty charge notice is issued correctly, you are not the tribunal and you are simply not qualified to decide whether the charge was correctly issued or not.

You were not required or under any legal obligation to pay anything as you could have made representations to the issuing authority, if you decided this was more hassle than it was worth that was your commercial decision but that has nothing to do with me and I should not have been charged for this decision.

If you had made representations to the enforcement authority requesting a transfer of liability then a new penalty charge notice would have been issued to me and that would have been the end of your involvement. As you have deprived me of any avenue of appeal to the tribunal, I'm afraid that was ZipCar's decision to do so, not mine.

In consideration of the circumstances, I would have hoped ZipCar would be understanding of the situation and at least have redirected the PCN to me after giving me a chance to explain, as per your website information (https://support.zipcar.co.uk/hc/en-gb/articles/115008239608-Traffic-Violations) which mentions "If we can, we will redirect the violation to you", as it is clearly the case regarding this PCN could have been redirected, which would have allowed me to appropriately challenge, removing any involvement of ZipCar and with all due respect, 'If we can..' is not similar to 'in our absolute discretion'. Being a customer who has rented your vehicles quite a few times and loyal customer, I believe I should have been given the courtesy to appeal this PCN.

If you do not issue a full refund within 14 days, I will issue county court proceedings against you.

Yours faithfully,

Savas

Hi cp8759, thank you for getting back to me.

Here's the email if it helps, it pretty much links to the page I provided on my first post:



Apologies for not waiting longer, I thought nobody would be interested as it's been paid and I would just get information so I opened a ticket to Zipcar stating almost the same, but your one is indeed more to the point and better. I could respond further if they do not do anything about it, but this is what I said:

Hello

On the 31/05/24 I rented one of your vehicles, however unfortunately on the 13/06/24 I received an email stating "Heads up, you’ve received a moving violation." with an attachment with a PCN. I have also been charged £95 by Zipcar.

As per the PCN letter and TFL online web page, I had the ability and right to challenge the PCN, however Zipcar has paid the PCN on the 10th and informed me on the 13th, removing the ability to appeal/challenge.

As per Zipcar's linked "violations policy" page:

https://support.zipcar.co.uk/hc/en-gb/articles/115008239608-Traffic-Violations

Which states "If we can, we will redirect the violation to you. If we can't redirect it, we will pay the fine, along with any late fees and bill the total to your account, provided that there are no grounds to appeal."

As per my attachment screenshot, the TFL website clearly allowed me to challenge the PCN and I believe I had grounds for appeal. Zipcar could have redirected it to me. The TFL link to challenge now gives an error and no longer works because the charge was paid. Paying is seen as admitting the ticket was right.

I can understand that your fee of £15 is clear regarding forwarding me the penalty charge, however paying the charge before allowing me to see or challenge does not correspond with the policy stated up and is unfair.

We had a none stop crying toddler and an emergency to stop was needed. Being unfamiliar with the area, and no pay and displays visible, I could not use my phone and felt it was the best place to stop. There was the ability to stop for a maximum of 20 minutes for loading and unloading. TFL also allows for challenging PCN's on mitigating circumstances and can make discretion, however this was not done.

I feel this is not fair how Zipcar have handled this.

Attached:
screenshot of their policy on their page zoomed in sections "Can I dispute it?" and "What happens if I receive a ticket after my reservation has ended?"
screenshot of TLF page showing payment done and "challenge" button.