Bus Lane PCN

[TheBogsDollocks]

In all seriousness, there are four key lessons here for me to share:

1) Always make informal reps and do so in detail.

2) Demonstrate that you know your stuff and have done your research.

3) Remember the objective, to have the PCN cancelled, it matters not why they do so just that it is done.

4) The LA in reality doesn't really care one jot about your ticket. So you need to find a reason to make them care, this could be because you make a reasonable and detailed case that is going to be complicated and expensive for them to defend or that it is going to expose them to a defect in their restrictions or enforcement processes.

 

Absolutely agree with you on this.

 

The FOI request is always a nice touch. Under FOI you are allowed a limit of approx £400 and so it would be economic stupidity for a council to spend £400 of man hours and materials to gather evidence for someone appealing a £60 or £120 PCN.

 

Also staff like an easy life and it's easier to accept an appeal than it is to gather difficult to obtain information.

[happyBoy]

Hello there!

Someone I know was last year a victim of the ever popular Kidbrooke Park bus lane and promptly recived a TFL notice to pay up. Having some experience of these forums, I had pointed my friend to this site and it seems he went along and pretty much sent an informal appeal (via email) based on the post from Bernie_the_Bolt - now interestingly enough, TFL responded with all manner of documentation (as a formal response via post) - but did/could not address all the items as had been requested. Moreoever - no where in thier response did they comment on either the validity of the notice OR what future action my friend was supposed to take.

Having waited a good few weeks, my friend once again emailed TFL with reference to the original PCN and subsequent response from TFL - asking what he should be doing - in response to which TFL - sent back the entire previous response (via post) with a line added to the cover letter stating 'our previous reponse clearly indicates what next action you may take'

No where in this second letter as well did TFL mention wether my friend needed to pay or not.

 

Subsequent to the 2nd letter from TFL - nothing further was ever heard or recieved in this regard.

 

It's been a little more than 8 months now from the date of the original TFL notice - my question is - Is this PCN / notice still valid or should we treat it as having been dismissed?

 

Regards,

HappyBoy

Bump!

[oskar62]

thanks to bernie and others for guidance on contesting pcns at this buslane

 

I appealed and then waited it out for six months and they did not pursue the case.

 

good luck to others who contest these ridiculous penalty charges

[botus]

Hi guys,

 

The same story for me. First of all thanks to everyone here for their contribution.

 

I have attached the response from TFL for my informal appeal ( copy of Bernie's one ).

 

It seems they have gathered some more documents so far to defend themself ( site map for Kidsbroke area and Traffic order for that location )

 

for camera pictures, they also explain they use code system to locate contravention; bla bla bla

 

I used also an argument that I know someone who works as an adjudicator, that I made my research and will do everything to cancel this pcn.

 

I found an interesting website :

 

London Motorists Action Group - TfL reviewing 'Confusing' road signs

 

saying kidbroke is on a list of 10 confusing roads to be reviewed by TFL...

 

Of course will use that fact in my formal representation also that they cancelled some of the pcn's of other people claiming - can be proofed.

 

Any suggestions?

 

Before I got here I had some pcn's in london's - where I found they sometimes put a fine despite you park legally assuming you won't claim...parking traffic officers...of course my claim has been accepted, as well as some others; all of this taught me to claim unless the contravention was obvious...

 

regards

kidbroke.zip

[agt2010]

I have got a similar Penalty charge Notice for Bus Lane contravention. It was just past midnight, with no cars to be seen at all.

 

I was new to this area and this (smallest bus lane I have ever seen) came in front and I just followed it through not realising the entrapment.

 

Anybody faced something similar recently and has appealed against it ??

[fokker]

An interesting site highlighting quite a few regulations bus lanes should conform to.

Two in particular to stop the Kidbrook lane scamera?

 

"An advance sign to warn there is a bus lane ahead and give you time to change lanes. This should be cited 30m in advance of the taper where the speed limit is 30mph and 45m in advance

 

 

and:

 

A bus lane should be commenced by a diagonal taper in the form of a dashed line approximately 30m long to give drivers time to change lane

 

 

This bus lane does not conform to either of these....?

 

Google map shows no advanced bus lane sign-

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&q=Kidbrooke+Park+Rd,+Greenwich,+London+SE3,+United+Kingdom&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=22.139685,67.631836&ie=UTF8&cd=1&geocode=FRlFEQMdamsAAA&split=0&hq=&hnear=Kidbrooke+Park+Rd,+London+SE3,+United+Kingdom&ll=51.458922,0.026337&spn=0.001419,0.004128&z=19&layer=c&cbll=51.459028,0.026316&panoid=vloG556b5RWCMqOrQgyxAg&cbp=12,8.14,,0,5

 

 

Traffic signs manual:

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/tss/tsmanual/tsmchapter3.pdf

see 15.9

 

 

 

How to appeal parking tickets, bus lane tickets, yellow box junction and moving traffic tickets

Edited May 12, 2010 by fokker
added traffic signs manual

[londonmotorist101]

Hello mates,

 

I have got my PCN for the Kidbrooke Park Road "bus lane" cancelled using the information all of you guys provided here. I recieved a PCN in May 2010 when I accidentally drove through the little "bus lane". As someone said here before, I was in the bus lane before I knew it and then there is no way out because of the width restriction in place. By that time the CCTV has caught you and you soon receive a PCN by post. I emailed an informal appeal within the allotted 14 days of PCN and initially recieved no reply from TFL. On sending a few reminders again by email, I recieved a reply by post. My PCN was cancelled but am unhappy about the wording of the cancellation. Still thinking what to do about it.

 

The reply basically states it is the drivers responsibility to to be aware of road signs and hence it was my fault. But as a gesture of "good will" since this is my first ever representation to TFL they are cancelling my PCN just this once. This the letter goes on to state this in no way means TFL accept anything I have said in the appeal. Personally I believe they know very well the PCN will not hold if it is contested and hence the cancellation. I am trying to find out how to get TFL to accept the bus lane is illegal and get them to remove it alltogether. Anyways here is the text of my appeal if it helps any one else:

 

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

I wish to appeal against PCN no: xxxxxxx, dated: XX May 2010.

 

My grounds for appeal are that for there to be a breach of the bus lane order or regulation the restrictions provided for in that bus lane order or regulation must be adequately and/or lawfully signed. Failure adequately and/or lawfully to sign the restrictions means that no breach of the order or regulation has taken place.

 

Transport for London’s highway engineers are provided with clear guidance on the provision of traffic signs within the Traffic Signs Manual, which confirm the correct signs and markings of a Bus Lane.

 

The Government Offices for the English Regions have published a document Traffic Management And Parking Guidance For London which states in section 2.99:

 

“Dilapidated, missing or incorrect traffic signs can only be seen as an indication that the relevant authorities or agencies have little concern for road users.”

 

My grounds for claiming that the 'Bus Lane' is not adequately and/or lawfully signed are as follows:

 

1) The start of the Bus Lane is incorrectly marked according to the Traffic Signs Manual

Chapter 5 of the Traffic Signs Manual states in paragraph 17.5

“The start of the lane is marked with a broken line to diagram 1010, the same width as the 1049 marking, and laid at a taper no sharper than 1:10. The lane should not start in such a position that the taper would extend across a side road junction.”

 

From the photograph attached (Kidbrooke_Rd.jpg) it is clear that the taper is greater than 1:10.

 

Also from other images sourced from Google(link below) it appears that the taper extends across part of the side road junction.

 

 

2) Chapter 5 of the Traffic Signs Manual states in paragraph 17.7

“Deflection arrows to diagram 1014 should be placed 15 m and 30 m upstream of the start of the taper. The arrows should be 4.5 m long for speed limits up to 40 mph, 6 m for 50 or 60 mph, and 9 m for 70 mph.”

 

From these images sourced from Google Maps link below, it can be clearly seen that only one upstream arrow is present. And even that arrow is not at the position required by the Traffic Signs Manual.

Kidbrooke Park RD, Greenwich, London SE3, United Kingdom - Google Maps

 

3) As per Traffic Signs Manual, Chapter 3, Section 15.9:

 

"Advance indication of a with-flow bus lane

is provided by the sign to diagram 958. Where the

speed limit is 20 mph or 30 mph, the sign should be

sited 30 m in advance of the lead-in taper formed by

the road marking to diagram 1010, with a minimum

clear visibility distance of 45 m. Where the speed limit

is 40 mph, the sign should be sited 45 m in advance

of the taper with a minimum clear visibility distance

of 60 m."

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/tss/tsmanual/tsmchapter3.pdf

 

As can be clearly seen in the image below sourced from Google Maps, the 30 m advance traffic sign with a clear visibility distance of 45 m does not exist.

Kidbrooke Park RD, Greenwich, London SE3, United Kingdom - Google Maps

 

This is another failure to meet the requirements of the Traffic Signs Manual by TFL.

 

4) The start of the Bus Lane is incorrectly marked according to TSRGD:

TSRGD diagram 1010 is used to signify the start of Bus Lanes.

The sign used does not appear to be of the correct dimensions (1,000mm for each line separated by a gap of 1,000mm). The sign should be laid diagonally to indicate the start of the Bus Lane, it appears to be laid in an arc.

TSRGD indicates “Permitted Variants None”

 

I further claim that the enforcement process is not being conducted in a lawful manner. My reasons for this are as follows:

 

5) The PCN mentions the location of the alleged contravention as "Kidbrooke Park Road" along with "Camera Operator Number RNC/097". There are a number of bus lanes on this road and it is therefore necessary for TFL to state which one is involved in the alleged contravention in order to discharge your statutory obligations. You have not done so.

 

It is not appropriate for TFL to rely on me interpreting your images and Camera Numbers and infering from them the location in which I am alleged to have committed a contravention. Any event it is TFL's obligation to "state" certain matters and this means "provide in words". You have not done so.

 

Under paragraph 3 (a) of S4 of the London Local Authorities Act 1996 a PCN is required to state "the grounds on which the council believe that the penalty charge is payable with respect to the vehicle". This PCN does not do so. Part of the grounds must by definition be to accurately describe the location in which the alleged contravention occurred.

 

Notwithstanding the above, the balance of this appeal is based on my inference as to the location and the provision of my arguments is not to be taken as a waiver or estoppel of my right to amend my representations should TFL seek to argue that the location I have inferred is in fact incorrect.

 

6)The pictures of the alleged contravention supplied on the PCN do not conform to The Bus Lane Enforcement Camera Handbook published by the Home Office.

This states as an “operational requirement” in item 5.1.2 that:

“Every image of the offence shall show, in addition to the offending vehicle, in the order given: the date in days, month, and year, the time in hours, minutes, and seconds, the day of the week, location and frame count from the beginning of the recording. The data shall be imprinted on the image or included in the violation record at the time the offence is recorded.”

The images do not show all the required data and do not show it in the order given.

Only “approved devices” can be used for CCTV enforcement. The failure to show the correct information and in the correct order must mean that the device used was not approved and therefore not lawful and the images are inadmissible to show any contravention or alleged contravention. The failure of the PCN to show lawful images renders it void and therefore there is no evidence of a breach of the bus lane order or regulation. TFL stating in the PCN that the said device was an "approved device" seems to be an incorrect representation of facts.

 

 

7) Despite this particular road in question, Kidbrooke Park Rd coming up as one of the Top 10 most confusing TFL roads up for review, as can be seen from websites like in London Motorists Action Group and in the BBC News

 

BBC brought out this story on 30th July 2008. Why hasn't any visible action been taken in this regard almost 2 years after the story was reported on BBC that TFL is reviewing this road amongst others ?

 

 

Should these representations be rejected then please treat this as a request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 for the following documents:

 

a) A copy of the bus lane order or regulation giving effect to the Bus Lane.

 

b) A copy of the Safety Audit for this road layout.

 

c) A copy of the engineer’s scale diagrams showing the layout of this Bus Lane, the road markings and the signage (including warnings of camera enforcement).

 

d) Copies of any approvals of deviations of signage from TSRGD.

 

e) Logs of maintenance visits verifying existence and condition of the signs.

 

f) Certification of type approval of the CCTV device.

 

g) A copy of the Camera Enforcement logbook recording the alleged contravention.

 

h) Copies of the still images showing all the required information in the correct order.

 

i) The number of PCNs issued by TFL in respect of this location.

 

j) The number of PCNs issued by TFL in respect of this location and cancelled by you following informal challenges.

 

k)The number of PCNs issued by TFL in respect of this location and cancelled by you following formal appeal to you.

 

l) The number of PCNs issued by TFL in respect of this location and cancelled following appeal to a PATAS adjudicator.

 

m)The number of PCNs issued by TFL in respect of this location and not pursued by you for any other reason.

 

n) The average monthly penalty revenue raised by TFL in respect of this location (north and south-bound and on both sides of the railway bridge). [Note that the aerial photo shows the pinch-point bus lanes on the south side of the bridge only.]

 

o) The total penalty revenue raised by TFL at this location since 31-07-2008 when this road has been reported by BBC to be up for review.

 

p) Number of compaints received with respect to this location from Motorists, both formal and informal and all records of action taken if any.

 

 

Please note that I am copying myself in this email to keep a record of date and time at which my appeal was sent to TFL.

 

Expecting a fair consideration

Thanking you

My_Name

[happyBoy]

Bernie - This on behalf of a friend (who I'm afraid does not get around the internet much ).

 

Just a note of thanks mate (this has been long pending, my apologies)!.

 

I had followed your advice as pointed out by happyBoy several months ago and sent an informal rep. to TFL and till date not really heard back conclusively from TFL (they sent a ton of docs though, but not all). They have neither rejected my appeal nor have they sent a notice of cancellation OR any other follow up / reminder - Regards, Steve.

The original PCN / notice recieved was over 12 months ago - am assuming this PCN is now as good as cancelled / dismissed?

[idbrooke victim]

Thank you Happy motorist for your posting. I have just received what I consider a complete rip-off pcn for kidbrooke park road. It shows a picture of my car partly in the little stretch of a bus lane, photographed by 'operator' RNC/097 at 3am! Apart from the car the area is completely deserted. I was there on the night in question, but only because I had been called out by my step daughter to help her with an emergency. She lives in South London. I live no where near South London. I had never been in the area before in my life and had never heard of this bus lane before.

 

This bus lane is a [problem]. The only thing showing in the photo is my car. Other wise the entire area is completely deserted. I didn't even know that I had gone into a bus lane or for how long. If this was genuine violation I'd pay up. I take road safety seriously and I have a completely clean record. This particular trick by Croydon is a scandal. it's just a [problem]. It's just the kind of thing that makes reasonable people hate these officials. Anyway, thanks for the tips on here. I've used the ideas and made an appeal.

[chezbranski]

i copied and pasted bernie the bolt's appeal and got a letter from london transport saying basically that they were correct in issuing fine for entering bus lane (kidbrooke park road) they as agesture of goodwill cancelled it, Get In !!!!!!!

[lamma]

goodwill - the local electors should be outraged that they are turning down revenue for the council as a personal favour to you. get some electors/ council tax payers to complain about this :) Its is a breach of their fiduciary duty isn't it ? :)

[green_and_mean]

goodwill - the local electors should be outraged that they are turning down revenue for the council as a personal favour to you. get some electors/ council tax payers to complain about this :) Its is a breach of their fiduciary duty isn't it ? :)

 

I think you will find the Council gets no money from Tfl penalty charges and Tfl is not elected.

[lamma]

Then report them to TflL's Revenue Control Inspectors. Simples

[green_and_mean]

Then report them to TflL's Revenue Control Inspectors. Simples

 

Do you know what a Tfl revenue control inspector is? But don't worry the next time I get asked for my ticket on the tube I'll mention this bus lane to the ticket inspector.

[lamma]

Yes I do. Ticket vultures operating on transport. TfL breaching its fiduciary duty by letting people off on a whim when according to TfL the PCN is valid. A lot of hard question for them to answer. Unless of course its just their feeble excuse and they lied about the validity of the allegation. Then its another set of questions they have to answer. maybe better with the mayor, the auditor and the CFO.

[green_and_mean]

Yes I do. Ticket vultures operating on transport. TfL breaching its fiduciary duty by letting people off on a whim when according to TfL the PCN is valid. A lot of hard question for them to answer. Unless of course its just their feeble excuse and they lied about the validity of the allegation. Then its another set of questions they have to answer. maybe better with the mayor, the auditor and the CFO.

 

I fail to see how someone responsible for checking people have paid to travel is a 'vulture' but that doesn't explain why you think a ticket inspector would be interested in a Bus lane PCN?

Councils are obligated to show discretion and accept mitigation therefore to do so is not grounds for complaint.

[lamma]

Discretion and mitigation - for a valid PCN ? Clear breach of fiduciary duty when the PCN is valid and there are no mitigating circumstances. You mis-use the word 'discretion' completely. Ahh, you work for a London council though as I recall so vested interest may be in play here.

[green_and_mean]

Discretion and mitigation - for a valid PCN ? Clear breach of fiduciary duty when the PCN is valid and there are no mitigating circumstances. You mis-use the word 'discretion' completely. Ahh, you work for a London council though as I recall so vested interest may be in play here.

 

Maybe you should report me to the ticket inspector to!

[bmu]

Thanks to everyone involved in these previous incidents. I hope no-one will object to my lifting chunks for an appeal of my own. I went to the (presumed!) location of the 'offence' today and took some pictures. These include pictures of one of the signs at the start of the bus lane facing the wrong way! All you see if you are travelling north up Kidbrooke Park Road is the grey plastic back of the sign, the useful part of which you could see clearly if you were coming the other way, where it could (although on wrong side of road) mislead you into thinking you were about to come to a bus lane policed by cameras, which you aren't because they are all behind you! Strangely it does not look like that in the picture in my PCN, but equally there is no evidence of recent disturbance/damage to the post or concrete it's embedded in. If I can master the process of uploading (only just conquered getting them from phone to PC), I can post these pictures. Any advice welcome.

I also checked (just in case Google map is out of date) and there is absolutely no evidence of any advance warning signs in either Weigall road or KP Road. Only signs are at very start of bus lane itself. Assuming I have got the right bus lane. As with others, no precise info re location supplied.

 

101 - did you ever get anywhere with your efforts to get the bus lane recognised as unlawful.

 

This is my first post - as with most people, I came to this site in desperate need - so apologies for any breaches of etiquette or anything else.

[idbrooke victim]

Just to update people on my posting of 21st July. I've been on holiday so couldn't get on here before now. As I said in that posting I'd made an informal appeal re. a pcn I got for allegedly going into the Kidbrooke Park Road bus lane ( at 3 am). I'm pleased to say that the TFL have to written to me that they have cancelled the fine. They said they took my particular grounds for appeal into consideration and the fact that I hadn't appealed before, although they insist the lane complies will all legal requirements. Obviously I'm pleased it has been cancelled, if it hadn't been I definitely would have taken it to a formal appeal as it was ridiculously unfair. I am left with two thoughts.

 

1. Is it right to have bus lane in operation 24 hours a day when there is virtually no traffic of any kind during the small hours of the morning? I'm not familiar with the Kidbrooke road area at all. Are there even buses running along there at three am? On the night in question, the entire area was completely deserted of all traffic, motorised or pedestrian. Bus lanes are not some divine manifestation. Their only justification must surely be to improve traffic flow and road safety when justified. If they are used fairly in those circumstances, I have no objection to them.

 

2. I think the Kidbrooke Road bus lane is completely ridiculous. It's more like an ambush set up to mug unsuspecting motorists as they turn the corner than anything else. It might be different if you know it is there or in the daytime when you can follow the traffic flow. Otherwise, I think its a traffic hazard itself and could cause accidents. It divides the road in a really confusing way. It's as big or even bigger, if memory serves me right, ( I've only ever come across the one time in the middle of the night)as the part of the road where you are supposed to go, and it is really confusing to be know, when you come on it suddenly, as to where you are supposed to drive. There is a natural tendency to come a complete stop as you try to work out where to go without the guidance of other traffic, which is obviously dangerous. There is also a natural tendency, when in doubt, to keep left (i.e. into this silly bus lane).

 

I've got no objection to enforcing rules of the road, where they are genuinely improving road safety or traffic flow. I question whether that is the case with this Kidbrooke Park Road thing. I 've never come across anything quite like it before.

 

Anyway, thanks to the people who posted here about how to appeal against this type of thing. I was very annoyed at being ripped off, as I see it, but had no idea how to make an appeal. Especially thanks to LondonMotorist101. I used some of his information to back up my appeal. I'm willing to hold my hand up if I do something wrong, but I don't like being turned over, as might have happened if I hadn't stumbled on this forum.

[bmu]

Here here, here here! My sentiments exactly. I have spent days preparing informal challenge, drawing heavily on material provided here by others, plus my own photographs, having revisited site (not convenient but I am just within range to do that). I too had never been there before the 'offence', and was completely thrown by the road layout, diverting left into the bus lane as what I believed to be the only safe option (feared if I went into other lane I might be on 'wrong side of the road'). Driving at night and with no flow of traffic ahead of me to guide me. No advance warning signs at all, then suddenly a proliferation of signs and information. Just to make it look like they've given fair warning, which they most certainly have not. If I was being paid £60 for the amount of time I have spent on this (not to mention possible future time), I'd consider it an hourly rate not worth working for (and probably below minimum wage), but like you, feel incensed that TfL is extorting money from innocent motorists in this way, and in the process endangering road users' safety.

 

Re the 24-hour bus lane, I don't know when buses run there. But I guess if they are trying to keep heavy vehicles off subsequent stretch of road because of weak bridge (as others have said), then they have to do it all the time. But I don't know why it is necessary to have a bus lane to do this, why not just give FAIR warning about the size of vehicles that may use that stretch of road and penalise the over-size ones, not the rest of us? Also don't know how come buses do not jeopardise the weak bridge. If cars aren't going to endanger the bridge, why penalise them for getting to it via this so-called bus lane? The lane serves no other purpose in terms of improving traffic flow and in some ways I wonder if it isn't an abuse of the power to create bus lanes to use it for this purpose. Rip-off, rip-off, rip-off.

 

Very glad you had your fine cancelled. Hope I am equally successful.

 

Incidentally, did you come across the lane after turning left (from Weigall Road) or via the bit of KPR between Eltham Road and Weigall Road? Either way I think it's equally confusing, and in truth, not being familiar with the area, am not 100% certain which approach I took, I just remember suddenly coming across that crazy lay-out and having to make a decision fast. And realising as I made it what I had (literally) got myself into. As Bernie said, a real 'oh ****' moment.

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

Interesting and gratifying to see the benefit to others from this thread. I may just hit TFL with the FOI request again!

[Synthshadow]

Hi Bernie and others.

 

I, like many of you on this thread have been recently caught by this camera and have just this minute sent off my appeal.

 

I must confess I have copy/pasted 99% of the wording on the appeal, I hope you don't mind Bernie and Londonmotorist101 as I'm really not au fait about constructing a professional appeal - or appealing in general, up til now I've been very much a "lay back and think of England" approach to fine paying.

 

Does anyone know or has anyone had any recent victories as regards appealing against this camera? Or have I potentially missed the window before Tfl made necessary adjustments to pooh-pooh any future appeals?

 

Many thanks once again, and hope to be able to update here with another victory story!

[bmu]

Hi, Synthshadow - and everyone else who has so helpfully contributed to this thread.

I used bits from other people's appeals and a few of my own - eg re sudden clutter of signage after total absence of warning signs (although there sort of is one now in Weigal Road). My ticket was cancelled by means of a somewhat incoherent letter that looked as if it had been cobbled together from bits of other letters. Complete non sequitur of paragraphs and punctuation between first and second (I assume - pages were not numbered, I did vaguely wonder whether one was missing!) pages. Cancellation was 'gesture of goodwill', gosh they are overflowing with the stuff, and the letter asserted 'signs indicating the presence of the bus lane are in place' and... 'meet statutory requirements'. Hmmmm. Cancellation was at informal reps stage, I was just a tad disappointed as I would have liked to see how they would have responded had I taken it further, which I would have done, all the way, I was so cross with them. But cancellation was probably marginally more a relief than a disappointment. The fact that they continue to operate and gain revenue from the bus lane in this way is shameful. I think it is easier for them just to continue responding ad hoc to reps than to do what they should do, so I doubt if you have missed any window. GOOD LUCK! Let us all know how you get on.

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

I have no issues with the use of my appeal as a template. That's what it is there for.

Regarding the possibility of a "sort of" warning in Weigall Road. If my memory is correct it is on a post for a Give Way sign and if my memory is also correct posts holding either Give Way or Stop signs are not permitted to hold other signage. Therefore this purported "warning" is inadequate and invalid.