If a driver u-turns immediately after a ‘No Right Turn’ sign, does s/he commit a contravention? Does anyone know of any adjudicator decisions on this question please?
It'll depend on the wording of the traffic order in place. Most prohibitions will be worded along the lines of 'Motor vehicles are prohibited from turning right from Main Street into Side Street', so a u-turn on Main Street should be ok unless expressly forbidden.
At your own risk, obviously. If the pigs see you doing it and it's one of the stupider ones they might still pull you over.
It'll depend on the wording of the traffic order in place. Most prohibitions will be worded along the lines of 'Motor vehicles are prohibited from turning right from Main Street into Side Street', so a u-turn on Main Street should be ok unless expressly forbidden.
I may be completely wrong, but ... the meaning of the NRT sign (as per TSRGD 2016, sh3, part 2) is simply "No right turn for vehicular traffic", with no ifs or buts about specific destinations. It is not possible to perform a U-turn without turning right.
It is not possible to perform a U-turn without turning right.
That's basically how I interpret the sign.
I was involved in a case in 2007 where a vehicle appeared to 3-point-turn after a NRT sign. The adjudicator allowed the appeal because the Authority failed to provide a TMO. But he remarked that he probably wouldn’t have allowed it on the basis that a u-turn was performed.
I’m specifically thinking about Aldwych/Strand (s/w bound) junction of Wellington Street (cycle track).
I’m specifically thinking about Aldwych/Strand (s/w bound) junction of Wellington Street (cycle track).
Yeah, you're hosed.
The
traffic order has a hatched area on wellington street which says only pedal cycles can enter, but it also says "No person shall cause any vehicle to enter the area of the carriageway which lies between the island sites" and you can't u-turn without breaching that.
@DrSatan I'm impressed that you managed to dig-out the order so quickly.
This is very helpful but in 2017 when the order was made, the NRT sign was not in place. Having read the order, it's not clear to me what 'island sites' actually means. If 'island sites' relates to the area of road reserved for buses turning onto Waterloo Bridge - then where's the exemption for buses and cycles? In 2022 (or slightly earlier) the markings were changed and the Aldwych Scheme was completed (with a new NRT sign).
I'll try and dig out the new TMO covering the Aldwych Scheme and see if it extends to this junction.
224007474A
The Appellant did not attend but was represented by Mr Morgan, whose detailed submissions I note. However it seems to me unnecessary to arrive at a final view on the merits of those submissions as the Appeal falls to be allowed for more fundamental reasons.
I am not satisfied on the evidence that the manoeuvre seen in the CCTV amounts to a U-turn.. The vehicle appears to be making a sharp right turn into an adjacent road; nor am I satisfied that, if this was a U-turn, that the signs prohibiting that manoeuvre were clear and visible. The site photographs showing the sign are not of the best quality or very informative. It also sems to me that the PCN itself is defective in that it does not clearly state what sort of turn is referred to as the basis for its issue and thus does not state what the motorist is supposed to have done wrong. There are occasions where defects in wording can be covered by what is shown in the photographs but that is not so in the present case. In my view the PCN therefore does not comply with the requirement to state the grounds on which a penalty is said to be due, and no penalty can be demanded on the basis of it.
For all these reasons the Appeal is allowed.
@Hippocrates, 224007474A appears to relate to Ilford High Road, west of Seven Kings Road. Whilst this seems to be a very interesting case, where the driver appears to turn right against a no-u-turn sign - I was thinking of this the other-way-around. What if the driver had u-turned against a NRT sign?
Yeah, you're hosed.
I don't think it's that clear-cut. The signage has to make the effect of the traffic order clear. I think I'd be chancing an appeal if I was in this situation on the grounds that both a no-u-turn and no-right-turn sign should be present if the traffic order prohibits both. If there isn't an allowed left turn at the location I think you'd have a strong case that an 'ahead only' sign should have been used.
I think you'd be on very strong grounds if you can find a location where the same council have stacked these 2 signs that you could show to an adjudicator.
I think you'd be on very strong grounds if you can find a location where the same council have stacked these 2 signs that you could show to an adjudicator.
@Grant_Urismo you make some very good points - Portland Place (s/b) j/o Devonshire Street springs to mind re stacked signs. There are several other examples in Central London but I can’t think of any others on Westminster’s roads.
Back to Aldwych... the only fly in the ointment is the markings in the centre of the junction with Wellington Street and the various Orders that exist for that junction.
@Hippocrates, 224007474A appears to relate to Ilford High Road, west of Seven Kings Road. Whilst this seems to be a very interesting case, where the driver appears to turn right against a no-u-turn sign - I was thinking of this the other-way-around. What if the driver had u-turned against a NRT sign?
There were two separate signs actually, each respectively pertaining to each different contravention. And the Adjudicator raised a point not made by the appellant (me as rep.).
Dislike x 1
View List