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 - Incandescent

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 488
1
We've seen this one before. I expect your driver approached the junction on Prince of Wales Road, wanting to turn right onto Shooters Hill Road, but right turns are barred, see GSV: -
https://maps.app.goo.gl/BXRzudtyqen8Gz7TA

So your driver drove on into Stratheden Road and turned right at the again barred right turn show on your photo hoping to get away with it. You can look at the video of this if you ring-up TfL and ask for it quoting the PCN number. TfL are, sadly, in the IT Dark Ages now, because the video is sent as a DVD. The PCN enforcement process will be frozen for about 10 days to give them time to produced it and send it out. Quite why TfL have this rather stupid system instead of having the vidoes on line like the London councils, only TfL know.

Anyway, I don't think you'd get much joy at London Tribunals, (TfL will obviously reject your reps), because the No Right Turn signs are clear enough. HOwever, there may be a technical appeal suggested which is unrelated to the contravention itself, based on TfL mismanagement of the enforcement process, so wait a bit to see if anything is suggested.

2
I've just had a quick look at the London Tribunals Statutory Register, and there are 142 successful appeals for this location. However there have been refusals too. I think much depends on how the case is presented, and which adjudicator one gets "on the day", because some recent recruits to London Tribunals seem very sadly lacking in commonsense, sorry to have to say it.

Carl Teper observed that the signage in place failed to convey the full traffic order information because these is nothing outside the restricted hours to tell you what those hours are, not even the dreadful so-called advance warning signs.

Anyway, here is the web page on London Tribunals. Enter the location "Royal Albert Way" and a start date, then select "appeal successful"
https://londontribunals.org.uk/ords/pwslive/f?p=14952:30::INITIALISE::Y::&cs=3kBpFAkkfHqNefFQR1fY4o4Ynd4p0a4-aQBhFlzeZfZ9AkWcr57qbFsf6EX2dHqKcQm8bWyNkJXJ9qm6nLiIShA


3
Parking in a marked bay puts you under an obligation to look for the sign controlling the bay, that is why the bay is marked out on the street, because there are restrictions on parking there. As tincombe says, there was an easily found sign but you didn't go and look for it. IMHO you would not win at adjudication.

4
I'm asking on behalf of someone else and he can't remember if he was in the bus lane earlier. I got the video from the council website so surely that's all the evidence they can base the PCN off? Please correct me if I am misunderstood. Thanks
If that is th e sole evidence then it shows how venal and rapacious Havering are. The PCN is probably the worst money-grubbing PCN I have seen in a very long time, and should be taken all the way to London Tribunals on the basis that the contravention did not occur. Of course this means risking the full PCN penalty.

I also recommend contacting Hippocrates.

5
What the photo shows is the absolutely absurd height of the sign on the left. If this was the only sign there when the OP drove past it, then that height should be a major point in the evidence because it is totally out of the sightline of the driver who should not have to be looking at sign positioned in the sky. The new sign on the right is correctly positioned.

6
Hi

There is an additional sign further down the bay, but the officer did not take a photo of the car in relation to it.

Here it is from StreetView - taken from directly adjacent to the covered parking sign. The other sign is at the far end that can just me made out.

https://imgpile.com/p/EUqskEd
Best if you send a GSV link rather than a screen capture. It means we can mozy around the location.

7
The video shows your left car wheels driving on the broad white line that delineates the bus lane, but doesn't show it entering the bus lane. So the question is - did you enter the bus lane at all before or after the video we can see ?

8
The Flame Pit / Re: Warburton toll bridge
« on: Yesterday at 01:17:01 pm »
I live near Crewe, and we use this bridge when we go to Bents Garden Centre. I've set-up an auto-pay account, and so far have had no trouble at all.

9
The Flame Pit / Re: School streets
« on: Yesterday at 01:07:16 pm »
They say all the signs are compliant with the TSRGD, but they have another set of regulations to follow that councils always seem curiosly reluctant to mention, the The Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996.
In particular, Regulation 18
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1996/2489/regulation/18
which puts a duty of placement of traffic signs that the council consider to adequately convey the restriction to motorists. It is possible to argue that 'adequate' signage has not been installed.

10
Do you have any idea which utility company was working there, or was it repairs to the road itself ?

Reason to ask is that sometimes utility companies have to make emergency repairs and this might not be recorded by the counci.

11
Oh dear, yet another PCN for this dreadful restriction that should have seen its instigators immediately sacked. Be aware that H & F will fight you all the way to London Tribunals, then not contest the case, because they are terrified what an adjudicator may say about this whole sorry affair. H & F broke just about every regulation there is in the The Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996

Look at the other cases on here for this location.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1996/2489/contents

12
GSV is dated Feb 2023, and the markings are pretty well worn out on that view of nearly 3 years ago. The law is that if you park in a marked-out bay, the onus is on you to determine what restrictions may apply. However, here, even though there is a sign,  if you parked some distance from it, there is no requirement to look, because as far as you can see, there are no parking bay markings.

However, such is the greed for cash with councils, that it is almost inevitable they will reject any representations you submit as an immediate challenge. The next stage, if you don't pay, is the service of a Notice to Owner to the person on the V5C Registration Certificate (what used to be called the "Log Book", because it was a complete record of the keepers).

So the question is, are you the V5C holder and if so, is the address up-to-date ?

is there some text on that first bit in any legistlation I can copy and past in my appeal?!
Somewhere in the dim and distant past ! You don't need to quote anything, just say that as no bay markings were seen, you assumed that parking was available and unrestricted. You could also say that the council are no doubt aware that without bay markings, any bar restrictions sign they erect has no effect in law.

13
Thanks for the reply, if i login either to pay or challenge it doesn't show any photos? Are they obliged to show them or do I have to request them?
This council may not get their CEOs to take photos, although I'm surprised you haven't found any. Photos are not, surprising as it may seem, a legal requirement. It is your son's word against the CEO

The photos, if there are any, may be accessible via the PCN payment pages.

14
If you go onto the council web pages, you should find pages to pay the PCN. It will be either a separate entry page to see the evidence, or a page from the entry page for paying the PCN. Normal entry is (1) PCN Number and (2) car registration.
Videos for moving traffic offences are normally there.

15
Unfortunately GSV is not up-to-date here, the latest view f=or your approach is May 2012, 14 years ago, but there is an NRT sign before the traffic lights, and the signalheads have the NRT sign too, so if this is still the signage, it doesn't look good, sorry to say it.

Wait a bit for others to comment, but don't miss the deadline for paying or appealing on the PCN.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 488