Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: PCN 53j Bell Green Lane Lewisham.
FightBack Forums > Queries > Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices
Kooky Cick
PCN dated 13/05/2022, 53j 'failing to comply with a restriction on vehicles entering a pedestrian zone (camera enforcement)

Bell Green Lane Junction of Stanton Way, LB Lewisham at 15.39 on Friday 06/05/2022

I would appreciate help making representations on this ticket. I did not see the signs... its at a narrowing of the road with cast iron bollards and I was concentrating on not scraping my car, rather than looking at road signs. I've used this route for 20 years, so I thought I knew what I was doing. I did previously notice a temporary sign suggesting new restrictions were coming into force, so I diligently checked google maps the night before, and the route showed up as fine. However that would have been outside the restriction hours.

( I probably didn't have google maps on when I was actually driving, which would have been within the restriction times.)

I cannot see the sign on the photos on the ticket, so I went and checked in person. I took photographs of the signs which are made of corrugated plastic, and are positioned so that they overlap, and it is very difficult to read the actual times of the restriction. One sign is also somewhat view-restricted by leaves.

There is no mention of access to video evidence on the PCN, so I cannot check that.

I would appreciate help checking the validity of the ticket,
and I will figure out how to upload the photograph of the signage

Many thanks in advance
cp8759
QUOTE (Kooky Cick @ Mon, 6 Jun 2022 - 18:24) *
There is no mention of access to video evidence on the PCN, so I cannot check that.

Give us the PCN number & number plate and one of us will post the video. Also give us a link to the exact spot on google streetview please.
Kooky Cick
@ cp8759

the PCN number is ZY04620895, and my reg number is LC57 HVT.

I have found another similar LB Lewisham appeal that cites no-provision of a postal address to send payment to.

Also some confusing legal speak about section 36 signs, and that the ticket should state that the contravention should be against the Section 36 SIGN, not the traffic management order; draft letter for the other case quoted below : I have to say, I don't understand this, even having read the relevant section of the Traffic Act. can anyone shed some light on this please? .... ( quoted draft follows)

"The authority cite a contravention of using a route restricted to certain vehicles (local buses and cycles only). This description setting out a prohibition. The sign used to convey this is the s.36 sign (953) a blue circle with a white border and white diagram. Where a s.36 sign is in
place any contravention must be against the RTA 1988 s.36 (drivers to comply with signs). The cited contravention is using a route restricted to certain vehicles, a contravention of a TMO.
The regulations, The London Local Authorities and Transport for London act 2003 Regulation 4(5) sets out the reasons an authority may issue a penalty charge notice.
(5) Subject to subsection (6) below, for the purposes of this section, a penalty charge is payable with respect to a motor vehicle by the owner of the vehicle if the person driving or propelling the vehicle—
(a)acts in contravention of a prescribed order; or
(b)fails to comply with an indication given by a scheduled section 36 traffic sig Subsection 6 imposes a caveat on section 5 as follows.
(6) No penalty charge shall be payable under subsection (5)(a) above where—
(a )the person acting in contravention of the prescribed order also fails to comply with an indication given by a scheduled section 36 traffic sign; or
(b)the contravention of the prescribed order would also give rise to a liability to pay a penalty charge under section 77 of the Road Traffic Act 1991 (c. 40).
This PCN alleges a breach of a prescribed order under 5(a) but in order that this contravention can occur a motorist must first be in breach of 5(b) failing to comply with a s36 traffic sign. As per subsection 6 no penalty can thus be demanded for the breach of 5(a).
On the 6th of August 2019 adjudicator Andrew Harman heard case 219043298. He allowed the appeal on the grounds that the contravention should have been against the sign, not the TMO.
The contravention alleged on the PCN is that this vehicle 'Used a route restricted to certain vehicles buses, cycles and taxis only'. The appellant submits however that the contravention is correctly stated as being of the council's S.36 sign conveying the restriction rather than of the restriction itself as set out in the Traffic Management Order she citing previous decisions of the adjudicator in support. The council does not appear to make any submissions in response to the point raised. I am satisfied having considered the matter my noting the review decision of the adjudicator under case reference 2170323030 as relied upon by the appellant that she is correct. I accordingly find that the contravention as stated on the PCN did not occur. Given my determination on that point I need make no further findings in this case. The appeal is allowed.
I ask the authority to follow the findings of Andrew Harman in case 219043298."

Thanks in advance for any help and advice
Kooky Cick
https://goo.gl/maps/trHM2mbBXydUhF128

this is the link to the exact location on google maps
Kooky Cick
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 6 Jun 2022 - 18:46) *
QUOTE (Kooky Cick @ Mon, 6 Jun 2022 - 18:24) *
There is no mention of access to video evidence on the PCN, so I cannot check that.

Give us the PCN number & number plate and one of us will post the video. Also give us a link to the exact spot on google streetview please.



I have posted the link above:

I've drafted a reply, and would be very grateful if someone with more experience could have a look over my draft.
Thankyou so much in advance
cp8759
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwxNvnLPHYY

The sign in question is not a section 36 sign, so point 2 of your draft is not applicable at all.

How do you explain missing the signs? They look perfectly visible to me?
Kooky Cick
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Tue, 7 Jun 2022 - 13:38) *
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwxNvnLPHYY

The sign in question is not a section 36 sign, so point 2 of your draft is not applicable at all.

How do you explain missing the signs? They look perfectly visible to me?


Thankyou so much for your help, and for finding the video. Should the Council not explain how to view it on the ticket?


I'm not sure how I missed the signs, but there are a lot at that junction. I can't remember really now. Maybe I misjudged the time, and I was concentrating hard on getting through the bollards safely.
my pictures show the signs are not that clear to read... made of 2 parts of plastic they overlap and slightly hide the times. I'm trying to upload.

can you explain why these are not S36 signs? similar appear in the road sign manual chapter 3
Should I try to look up the TMO? or just appeal to their good nature


I need to go read the info on how to upload photos
astralite
It seems you have passed the discount period and time is pressing on the 28 days. I can’t help on technicalities however watching the video (albeit on a small laptop screen) I note that I can’t read anything on any of the signs you passed.
Look forward to seeing the photos you took.
cp8759
QUOTE (Kooky Cick @ Wed, 8 Jun 2022 - 08:40) *
Thankyou so much for your help, and for finding the video. Should the Council not explain how to view it on the ticket?

Ideally they should but it is not a legal requirement.

QUOTE (Kooky Cick @ Wed, 8 Jun 2022 - 08:40) *
I'm not sure how I missed the signs, but there are a lot at that junction. I can't remember really now. Maybe I misjudged the time, and I was concentrating hard on getting through the bollards safely.
my pictures show the signs are not that clear to read... made of 2 parts of plastic they overlap and slightly hide the times. I'm trying to upload.

Upload to google drive, dropbox or similar and post a link.

QUOTE (Kooky Cick @ Wed, 8 Jun 2022 - 08:40) *
can you explain why these are not S36 signs? similar appear in the road sign manual chapter 3

Because the regulations do not say that the signs are section 36 signs. Section 36 signs do not need a TMO.

QUOTE (Kooky Cick @ Wed, 8 Jun 2022 - 08:40) *
Should I try to look up the TMO? or just appeal to their good nature

You only have until Monday, so you won't get hold of the TMO in time. Make an appeal to their good nature and by the time they come back, I should have a copy of the traffic order.
Kooky Cick
here's a link to my photos of the signage. and my latest draft letter

The sign overlaps so you can't read the times easily, its especially bad approaching from the right hand side. I passed the one on Stanton Way.
There is another on Haseltine Road for vehicles coming the other way. not relevant to my case, although it might help someone else, and it shows the same issue in another location.

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Qax...k-O?usp=sharing

I can't tell you how much I appreciate the help and info on this site


PS does anyone know how to edit my handle? I'm a bit of a spelling OCD'er with a habit of miss-spelling my own name.
cp8759
You need to change the sharing setting of the folder to "public", otherwise we can't see it.
cp8759
The Lewisham (School Streets – Phase 2) (Covid-19) (Temporary Prohibition of Traffic) Order 2020: https://bit.ly/3nIUP93
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2024 Invision Power Services, Inc.