3. Messages

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Phantomcrusader

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
1
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Bristol bus lane trap
« on: January 18, 2026, 06:46:04 pm »
There is no bus lane signage in place. The only signs placed are signs conveying park & ride and lastly, a sign conveying a route restricted to certain vehicles. In this case the signs convey that the route is restricted for use by buses, pedal cycles and taxis only. Contravening this sign is, according to Govt guidance, a moving traffic contravention and not a bus lane contravention. Therefore the appropriate contravention description is Code 33 - Using a route restricted to certain vehicles. You can use the text below in your formal reps but also wait to see if others offer other angles of attack.

The Council’s website states that a bus lane is formed of a solid thick white line with the legend “Bus Lane” marked on the carriageway. None of these defining features were present and so I was not in a bus lane. Your website address stating this is provided below.

https://www.bristol.gov.uk/residents/parking/parking-fines-bus-lane-fines-and-towed-away/bus-gates

The Statutory Guidance for Local Authorities Outside London on Civil Enforcement of Bus Lane and Moving Traffic Contraventions issued by the Secretary by State for Transport does under Annex A, advise that the round blue sign is a traffic sign conveying a moving traffic contravention. The Council has wrongly accused me of a bus lane contravention. The correct description for contravening the sign is code 33 "using a route restricted to certain vehicles". As demonstrated by the aforementioned Annex A, a procedural impropriety has occurred as the wrong contravention description is stated on the PCN and for this it should be cancelled.

2
The Flame Pit / Re: Access restrictions to stop rat running
« on: January 12, 2026, 09:49:34 pm »
The DfT operational guidance which has since been withdrawn advised

10.65 Registration with the TEC can be transferred to the Sheriff’s Court in Scotland so that enforcement can be carried out against a motorist whose vehicle is registered at an address in Scotland. However, registration against a motorist whose vehicle is registered at an address in the Isle of Man, the Channel Islands or a foreign country cannot be enforced.

I don’t believe this has changed. Therefore it’s surprising that courier companies and many other companies don’t take advantage of this to avoid paying PCN’s. Most councils write off PCN’s issued to vehicles registered to a Scottish or Northern Ireland address because the costs and admin involved to transfer debt registration to their court system is too timely and costly that it's not worth it.

3
The Flame Pit / Re: Do normal road laws apply on a closed road
« on: January 12, 2026, 09:00:14 pm »
Road closures are generally brought about by the local council making a temporary traffic regulation order (TTRO) or temporary traffic regulation notice (TTRN). Some info is provided here.

A road closure TTRO or TTRN does not usually suspend any speed or parking regulation orders and therefore they remain in effect despite the road closure.

If the TTRO or TTRN prohibits driving (accessing) or parking on the closed road, it is an offence to do so under s.16(1) RTRA 1984. How the offence is enforced depends on the offence. Driving is likely to be enforceable by the Police and parking by the local council. The Police may consider  ignoring the road closed sign as careless and inconsiderate driving which is an offence under s.3 Road Traffic Act 1988 (especially if road workmen are inconvenienced or endangered).

4
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Winchester, Reg 10 Drive-Away PCN – Contravention 73, Cossack Ln Car Park
« on: January 10, 2026, 12:58:44 am »
Whatever you choose to write in your challenge, I suggest you include the following paragraph.

I also put it to the Council that there was no parking device in the car park that satsified the definition of  "parking device" as described under section 35(3B)of the Road Traffic Reguation Act 1984. Ringo is not a "parking device" when it fails to connect to a device. If a ticket machine is out of order it is expected to be covered over and clearly publicly noticed as such and no parking penalty is imposed. Consequently, if a internet connection is out of order or unconnectable this should be made public and not be automatically assumed to be the fault of the customer. If you search your Ringo records you will find that they have admitted their service does at times fail. On this occassion it failed and I am not at fault. If you disagree, please provide me with all email notifications from Ringo in the last 12 months so that I can prepare for my defence at adjudication. If necessary, please consider this request as a formal Freedom of Information request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

5
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Bolton, parked on a taxi rank, Churchgate, no white or yellow line markings
« on: January 09, 2026, 09:37:08 pm »
Quote from: SteveinBolton on January 09, 2026, 04:42:52 pm

Many thanks for that, it's an option I could try if I manage to get back on to the Bolton Council appeals website. I'll check on Monday.
If the website does not currently let you make formal representations, take screen shots of this failure because it may be another nail in their coffin.

6
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Bolton, parked on a taxi rank, Churchgate, no white or yellow line markings
« on: January 09, 2026, 09:13:13 pm »
In my experience no Council will ever hold their hands up and admit they got something wrong.You have to bear in mind that the people who read your appeal are just pen pushers and not very knowledgeable. For example. They cannot even get the contravention description correct. It should read as "waiting on a taxi rank" for code 45. See the Govt guidance they are obliged to follow. "Parking on a taxi rank" is outdated and no longer the correct wording.This is another angle and I've added it to what I previously wrote. If I am wrong in my posts, others on here would say so.

7
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Bolton, parked on a taxi rank, Churchgate, no white or yellow line markings
« on: January 09, 2026, 04:23:58 pm »
The restricted zone entry sign is not prescribed as the lower panel contains the word ”taxis”. See Part 4 in the regs where there is no mention of the word”taxis”. Also, the small yellow sign near to where you parked is not prescribed for use in a restricted zone since it also contains the word”taxis”. See Part 3 item 4 in the regs where “taxis” is not a permitted variant.

In summary, your challenge is

There was nothing about the feature of the carriageway, whether by marked lines or a change in surface colour/texture to bring to my attention that the location was a taxi rank and after researching it has come to my attention that the “taxis” element on the lower panel of the restricted zone entry sign is not prescribed under Schedule 5, Part 4 of the TSRGD 2016 and that the use of the word “taxis” on the upright yellow sign near to where I parked, is not prescribed under Schedule 4, Part 3 Item 4. Therefore the Council has placed unlawful signage. Had the Council followed the law and signed the taxi rank in accordance with the TSRGD 2016 the contravention could have been avoided. The statutory guidance issued by the secretary of state instructs the following:

"Authorities should not issue PCNs when traffic signs or road markings are incorrect, missing or not in accordance with the TRO. These circumstances may make the order unenforceable. If a representation against a PCN shows that a traffic sign or road marking was defective, the authority should accept the representation because the adjudicator is likely to uphold any appeal."
Therefore, as I have demonstrated the taxi rank signage is not prescribed and correct, I trust the Council will have regard to the guidance as it is duty bound to do and cancel the penalty charge.

Furthermore, the contravention description of “Parked on a taxi rank” is no longer prescribed. The correct wording in the circumstances relating to this PCN is “waiting on a taxi rank” as prescribed by the statutory guidance issued by the secretary of state under Annex B: Contravention codes for civil parking enforcement, England-wide. By failing to adhere to the guidance the Council has once again shown disregard and committed a procedural impropriety requiring the penalty to be cancelled.

8
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Bristol - Code 34J - Being in a Bus Lane
« on: January 01, 2026, 12:08:03 am »
The Council at this stage won't admit any wrong doing. It's only at adjudication that you can expect an indepedent view. If you get the opportunity to pay the discount, take it unless you can afford to pay the full amount. In my opinion you have nothing to pay based on my argument should it go to adjudication but this is no guarantee. Councils know that most people would rather pay the discount than risk paying the full amount. You must act as you can afford should you lose.

9
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Bristol - Code 34J - Being in a Bus Lane
« on: December 29, 2025, 05:40:44 pm »
There is no bus lane signage in place. The only signs placed are signs conveying a route restricted to certain vehicles. In this case the signs convey that the route is restricted for use by buses, motorcycles, pedal cycles and taxis only. Contravening this sign is, according to Govt guidance, a moving traffic contravention and not a bus lane contravention. Therefore the appropriate contravention description is Code 33 - Using a route restricted to certain vehicles. You can use the text below in your formal reps but also wait to see if others offer other angles of attack.

The Council’s website states that a bus lane is formed of a solid thick white line with the legend “Bus Lane” marked on the carriageway. None of these defining features were present and so I was not in a bus lane. Your website address stating this is provided below.

https://www.bristol.gov.uk/residents/parking/parking-fines-bus-lane-fines-and-towed-away/bus-gates

The Statutory Guidance for Local Authorities Outside London on Civil Enforcement of Bus Lane and Moving Traffic Contraventions issued by the Secretary by State for Transport does under Annex A, advise that the round blue sign is a traffic sign conveying a moving traffic contravention. The Council has wrongly accused me of a bus lane contravention. The correct description for contravening the sign is code 33 "using a route restricted to certain vehicles". As demonstrated by the aforementioned Annex A, a procedural impropriety has occurred as the wrong contravention description is stated on the PCN and for this it should be cancelled.

Should the Council not agree with the above, I require the Council to give full reasoning for any rejection with counter arguments directing me to the law that the Council rely upon for their rejection and for dismissing the guidance issued by the Secretary of State.

10
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Bus Lane Fine cambridge
« on: November 21, 2025, 07:47:25 pm »
There is no bus lane signage in place. The only signs placed are signs conveying a route restricted to certain vehicles. In this case the signs convey that the route is restricted for use by buses, pedal cycles and taxis only. Contravening this sign is, according to Govt guidance, a moving traffic contravention and not a bus lane contravention. Therefore the appropriate contravention description is Code 33 - Using a route restricted to certain vehicles. You can use the text below in your formal reps but also wait to see if others offer other angles of attack.

The Statutory Guidance for Local Authorities Outside London on Civil Enforcement of Bus Lane and Moving Traffic Contraventions issued by the Secretary by State for Transport does under Annex A, advise that the round blue sign is a traffic sign conveying a moving traffic contravention. The Council has wrongly accused me of a bus lane contravention. The correct description for contravening the sign is code 33 "using a route restricted to certain vehicles"
As demonstrated by the aforementioned Annex A, the wrong contravention description is stated on the PCN and for this it should be cancelled. Should the Council not agree with this point of law, I require the Council to give full reasoning for any rejection with counter arguments directing me to the law that the Council rely upon for their rejection and for dismissing the guidance issued by the Secretary of State.

I suggest you also point out that the PCN is missing the statutory ground of appeal below which also merits cancellation of the penalty under the ground of procedural impropriety.

(i)the enforcement notice should not have been served because—


(i)the penalty charge has already been paid in full, or

(ii)the penalty charge has been paid, reduced by the amount of any discount set in accordance with Schedule 9 to the TMA 2004, by the applicable date as specified in paragraph 1(3) of Schedule 3 to the 2022 General Regulations.

11
The Flame Pit / Re: Ability of Drivers to Process Complex Signs: Diagram 618.3C for School Streets
« on: November 06, 2025, 01:47:19 am »
My issue with the 618.3c sign relates to the definition given in the TSRGD 2016
Quote
“pedestrian and cycle zone”
an area—
(a)
which has been laid out to improve amenity for pedestrians and cyclists; and
(b)
to which the entry of vehicles, except pedal cycles, is prohibited or restricted
More often than not, the area has NOT been laid out to "improve amenity for pedestrians and cyclists". Usually just the sign has been erected and nothing else improved. In most cases it just looks like any other road apart from the sign. Any challenge should say the definition criteria for a "pedestrian and cycle zone" under the TSRGD 2016 has not been met and so the sign is ultra vires.

12
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: TWO(!) Bus gate PCNs on Arundel Gate, Sheffield
« on: September 29, 2025, 02:33:34 pm »
They accuse you of being in a bus lane.

This is the 1991 parent order that regulates their bus lanes. Note that the definition of bus lane refers to areas of carriageway listed in schedule 1 and 2.
This order amends the 1991 parent order. Note that it adds the Arundel Gate bus gate to schedule 3 of the 1991 parent order. According to their own definitions, Arundel Gate bus gate is not a “bus lane” since it is not an area of carriageway listed in either schedule 1 or 2 of the 1991 parent order and so the alleged contraventions did not occur.

13
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: West Northamptonshire Bus Lane PCN - Order for Recovery
« on: September 28, 2025, 03:14:06 am »
If you get another PCN like this at any time, I suggest arguing that the PCN fails to state the contravention time as required by regulations. It gives a detection time but the PCN says the CCTV is unmanned. Therefore, the time it is detected could be taken as the time/date a person views the contravention rather than the time/date it actually occurred. There is no reason for the Council to deviate from the required language. By doing so they may cause unnecessary ambiguity.

14
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Bus lane contravention Bridge street west Manchester
« on: September 28, 2025, 02:53:04 am »
No not at all. Give this a go.

The alleged contravention did not occur. Having viewed Manchester Council’s bus lane TRO’s that are published on the Traffic Penalty Tribunal website such as TRO reference MC262B, it is evident that Manchester Council define a bus lane as an area of carriageway having a thick white line to diagram 1049 of the TSRGD. The area of carriageway my vehicle occupied in your camera recording is not an area of carriageway that has a thick white line to diagram 1049. Consequently, my vehicle was not in a bus lane according to the definition your TRO’s use.

Furthermore, the placed round blue traffic sign to diagram 953 of the TSRGD is a traffic sign that restricts a route to certain vehicles. The Statutory Guidance for Local Authorities Outside London on Civil Enforcement of Bus Lane and Moving Traffic Contraventions issued by the Secretary by State for Transport does under Annex A advise that this sign is a traffic sign conveying a moving traffic contravention and therefore it is not a sign subject to a bus lane contravention. In which case the Council has used the wrong contravention description. The correct description for contravening the sign is code 33 "using a route restricted to certain vehicles"

The penalty charge should be cancelled because my vehicle was not in a bus lane as defined by your TRO. If this is not accepted, the penalty charge should be cancelled because the signage used conveys a moving traffic contravention and not a bus lane contravention as demonstrated by the aforementioned Annex A and therefore the wrong contravention description is stated on the PCN.
Should the Council not agree with these two points of law, I require the Council to give full reasoning for any rejection with counter arguments directing me to the law that the Council rely upon for their rejection.

15
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Bus lane contravention Bridge street west Manchester
« on: September 17, 2025, 02:17:08 pm »
Manchester’s bus lane TRO’s seem to define a bus lane as being bounded by a thick white line but there is no thick white line present. If the bus lane TRO you allegedly contravened uses the same definition, the argument is that the PCN must be cancelled as there is no bus lane in that location as defined by the TRO.
 
I’m guessing that the bus gate is indicated by a round blue sign with a picture of a bus. If so, the sign conveys that the route is restricted for use by buses. Contravening this sign is, according to Govt guidance, a moving traffic contravention and not a bus lane contravention. Therefore the appropriate contravention description is Code 33 - Using a route restricted to certain vehicles.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5