Free Traffic Legal Advice

In his/her defence, could OP use Schedule 7, Part 6, para.4, (2)(b) of The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016, which states:

 “(b)a vehicle which is prevented from proceeding by circumstances beyond the driver’s control or which has to be stopped in order to avoid injury or damage to persons or property;”

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/7/made

Shouldn't the PCN (link in first post) state that "The Penalty Charge must be paid before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of service of the notice".

Same applies to the language immediately below re: discounted period?


@Hippocrates @cp8759 - your thoughts?

As expected, LBR's Rejection of initial reps (redacted)

Awaiting NtO.

Barred from attending council meetings.

If you think Southwark is bad, try and attend a Redbridge council meeting.  Bar the public gallery, full of incompetent lackeys, all towing the same line.  'Tis very incestuous.

Hello folks!

Redbridge
AF49953922
SAF17A

PCN (redacted)

CCTV Footage

GSV

My proposed reps to Redbridge are:

/////////////////////////////
1) the alleged contravention of ‘34j – Being in A Bus Lane’ did not occur due to the following:
  a) The exact locus of the alleged contravention is not stated in the PCN;
  b) a Bus Lane only becomes effective/enforceable where the white solid line starts;
  c) I put to you strict proof that the vehicle encroached beyond the solid white line as let alone ‘de minimis’, the vehicle alleged didn’t even pass beyond the section where  the white solid line begins. If anything, the vehicle began to reverse prior to that and was only delayed by and due to safety concerns of other vehicles passing behind it; and
  d) full and extended CCTV footage rather than a misleading shortened clip (as is the usual ploy of Redbridge parking enforcement CCTV operators), would corroborate the above.

2) in light of the above, cancel the PCN;

3) be forewarned that should you not cancel this PCN, I will be taking this matter to tribunal and making a request for costs.
/////////////////////////////

Feedback/thoughts welcome.

Thanks - NTIAEP

For these types of alleged contraventions, is there a visible demarcation line that must be [wholly/partially] crossed? and/or will the corresponding TMO refer to e.g. double-yellow lines?

LBR rejected my initial reps (see NoR here)

As foreseen above, off to tribunal we go....again!  Might as well pitch a virtual tent within their meeting rooms.

Unless advised to the contrary, can't also use @Hippocrates argument (see here) as that pertains to PCNs issued under the 'London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003', whereas this PCN was issued under 'Traffic Management Act 2004' and doesn't contain the same language.  Whether or not it should is another matter.