Bus Lane PCN London Rd Metron

[Dangerdoc]

Hi Guys,

 

Need some specialist advice. Whilst travelling South in London Road, Mitcham I was driving a vehicle that was clocked driving a short distance into a bus lane. I agree it was a bit naughty and the reason was that my passenger was about to throw up. I wanted to be in a position to stop the vehicle safely if I needed to. In any case I managed to get just around the corner and stopped without being an obstruction. Regardless, I think the photographic evidence supplied is faulty in that I am given to believe that each photograph should have a list of unique identifiers, but not all are present.

 

Further the bus lane starts a long way back and it is broken by a pedestrian crossing, roughly in the middle of the length of the lane, and I wonder if there is specific signage that should be posted after the pedestrian crossing, (there are zig-zag lines and it is a full width of the carriageway crossing).

 

I am also given to believe that there needs to be an additional bus lane sign AFTER each side road and there is none.

 

The distance driven was quite short and I believe it was probably less than 20m but I am unceratain.

 

An informal challenge will be submitted as I think they are incorrect in their submmission. I am suspicious about the actual wording on the PCN in relation to the wording of the summary section starting "The Council believes....".

 

Can you experts in this field shine some light on this please.

 

Thanks very much.

 

There is a detailed response that got me thinking about this here

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?290879-Bus-Lane-PCN

 

Especially this section:

 

"5) 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."

 

Your opinions and thoughts please everyone. Please though, do remember that comments on what you "think" "might" be the law are not ideal, but still appreciated.

 

I have images of the documents here:

 

Doc

[Dangerdoc]

Quick update, 177 views and no replies. Are the moderators bocking responses?

 

Moving on, does anyone know what the rules are in regard to bus lane sign placement AFTER entering a carriageway from a side road? I am meeting some conflict on this. Apparently there must be a sign on the side road stating that the main carriageway has a bus lane, either "with flow" or "contra-flow" but it needs a warning sign. What I want to know is there a requirement for the main bus lane to have a sign stating the bus lane use and operation times, rather than just a sign at the start and at approx every 300m etc...

 

Please update me guys this is important.

 

Also, the Mitcham Council have stated that I can book an appointment to view the video footage but have NOT given me an opportunity to have a copy sent to me. In order to do this I need to take time away from work which is a significant financial penalty as I locum (thats about £340 for a half day) and I think that not offering the provision to supply a copy of the footage is not being fair and reasonable and a breach of my rights to prepare a proper defence by way of witholding evidence.

 

What is the opinion on this please.

 

Many thanks to you all.

 

Doc.

[Dangerdoc]

Are the moderators bocking responses?

That should of course be "blocking" responses. oops.

[green_and_mean]

Hi Guys,

 

Need some specialist advice. Whilst travelling South in London Road, Mitcham I was driving a vehicle that was clocked driving a short distance into a bus lane. I agree it was a bit naughty and the reason was that my passenger was about to throw up. I wanted to be in a position to stop the vehicle safely if I needed to. In any case I managed to get just around the corner and stopped without being an obstruction. Regardless, I think the photographic evidence supplied is faulty in that I am given to believe that each photograph should have a list of unique identifiers, but not all are present. There is no requirement to even supply photos so it cannot be a breach of their legal duty to contain any info, any requirement would apply to the original footage anyway.

Further the bus lane starts a long way back and it is broken by a pedestrian crossing, roughly in the middle of the length of the lane, and I wonder if there is specific signage that should be posted after the pedestrian crossing, (there are zig-zag lines and it is a full width of the carriageway crossing). No.

I am also given to believe that there needs to be an additional bus lane sign AFTER each side road and there is none. There are no side roads off the bus lane?

The distance driven was quite short and I believe it was probably less than 20m but I am unceratain. ....and? There is no minimum distance before the contravention occurs you can even be stationary.

An informal challenge will be submitted as I think they are incorrect in their submmission. I am suspicious about the actual wording on the PCN in relation to the wording of the summary section starting "The Council believes....".

 

Can you experts in this field shine some light on this please.

 

Thanks very much.

 

There is a detailed response that got me thinking about this here

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?290879-Bus-Lane-PCN

 

Especially this section:

 

"5) 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."

 

Your opinions and thoughts please everyone. Please though, do remember that comments on what you "think" "might" be the law are not ideal, but still appreciated.

 

I have images of the documents here:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]34197[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]34198[/ATTACH]

 

Doc

 

The signage issue is a non starter unless its changed from when it was filmed on google it looks fine, if you enter from the opposite side of the carriageway no sign is required as you would have to cross a solid white line to enter the bus lane a sign is only required if the bus lane crosses the side road.

[honeybee13]

That should of course be "blocking" responses. oops.

 

Not to my knowledge. You've had a reply now, hope that helps.

 

HB

[Dangerdoc]

Thanks for that. It has indeed helped.

 

I was down at the bus lane measuring everything and their measurements seem miles out. Also two of the bus lane signs depicting operational times are very angled away from the visual field of the driver. Pics to come as on mobile at the moment.

 

Their BUS LANE wording is incorrectly sized, their 1010 taper line markings and spaces are incorrect and so on.

 

One question before I write to them is:

 

What are the meanings of the dimensions in parenthases, the brackets, actually mean in the diagrams for the signs as set out in the TSRGD 2002? Are they tolerance limits or something else.

 

Thanks again.

 

Doc

[HYMN AND MI]

They are not legally obliged to supply you with a free copy of the video footage before PATAS. Saw a decision on this last week, I am afraid.

[green_and_mean]

Also, the Mitcham Council have stated that I can book an appointment to view the video footage but have NOT given me an opportunity to have a copy sent to me. In order to do this I need to take time away from work which is a significant financial penalty as I locum (thats about £340 for a half day) and I think that not offering the provision to supply a copy of the footage is not being fair and reasonable and a breach of my rights to prepare a proper defence by way of witholding evidence.

 

What is the opinion on this please.

 

Many thanks to you all.

 

Doc.

 

You get a copy of the cctv before the adjudication hearing so it doesn't affect your legal rights to the evidence before any proceeedings, you obviously spent time in Mitcham measuring all the road markings, ten minutes just down the road to view the dvd would surely not have been that difficult.

[HYMN AND MI]

When we see the pics of the signs, there are a couple of cases I can direct you to which were won re just one of them being angled.

[Dangerdoc]

Thanks Green and Mean, but I don't really get how you work out my time available to simply spend "ten minutes down the road" as my schedule was very tight. I was on call and slotted in the measurements with a couple of friends who live locally so it was a three person effort in a detailed manner but quickly. Sorry but assumptions are not fair but your opinion does make sense to some I suppose. Your other comments are very much appreciated.

 

Now to the images. I have taken loads. Looking at the regulations and the variants on sign dimensions, permitted % of variants in relation to Schedule 5 and Schedule 6 road markings just about everything is incorrect. Out of the five "BUS LANE" signs four out of five are under the minimum space dimensions between the words when considering the spacing requirements of 1600mm lettering and 1000mm spacing. The arrows at the start of the taper on BUS LANE commencement are too small, the taper is less than 1 : 10 and so on. It is rediculous but lets get to the sign images.

 

Due to time constraints we did not have time to actually measure the signage on the street lighting stanchions and the elements they contain to ensure their ratios are correct and represent compliance.

 

Over the the wizards again.

 

You guys are brilliant.

 

Doc

[Dangerdoc]

Ok I have no idea what happened there with the pics. Not used to this. I will try again as there should be more.

This is the first image and represents the sign some 56m before the bus lane commencement

 

 

This is the same sign again but from another angle.

 

 

 

 

The above three are the sime sign from various angles to fairly represent the angle in relation to the kerb and the non-compliance of the 90° requirement.

[Dangerdoc]

Now we have the next and most important sign group I feel. Not only is this sign widly angled but it is the sign nearest to where I had to enter the bus lane and I feel that has a bearing. Look at the state of the cleanliness and poor upkeep of the signs. The whole area is a mess of degraded signs and so on.

 

 

 

 

 

Doc

[Dangerdoc]

I have no idea why it is messing about the images like this. Both posts directly above were submitted using the same method. Hmmmm. Maybe some pointers on image posting might help as well

 

If you want images sent to you directly please pm me

 

Doc

[HYMN AND MI]

The Local Authorities Traffic Orders(Procedure)(England and Wales) Regulations 1996:

 

Traffic signs

 

18.—(1) Where an order relating to any road has been made, the order making authority shall take such steps as are necessary to secure—

 

(a)before the order comes into force, the placing on or near the road of such traffic signs in such positions as the order making authority may consider requisite for securing that adequate information as to the effect of the order is made available to persons using the road;

 

(b)the maintenance of such signs for so long as the order remains in force; and

 

©in a case where the order revokes, amends or alters the application of a previous order, the removal or replacement of existing traffic signs as the authority considers requisite to avoid confusion to road users by signs being left in the wrong positions.

 

You should argue, as in this case, that you did not see the signs because they were angled in such an oblique manner: 2110011685

 

The council failed to maintain the signage in place therefore the contarvention did not occur. Submit your evidence. I bet they will right those signs on receipt of your representation!

[Tony P]

If you can get back there, take another just as the last photo in post 12, but from standing towards the centre of the road, where a Drivers line of sight would be from.

This second one would make it even clearer it is unclear!

[HYMN AND MI]

If this were my ticket, I would drive there with a passenger to video it on a phone. However, IMO your photos establish that the contravention did not occur as per 18(b) above.

[Dangerdoc]

Hi Hymn and MI,

 

What were the cases to cite as just about to finalise the submission.

 

Cheeries.

 

Doc

[HYMN AND MI]

This is the most pertinent as it involves the pole sign: 2110011685.

[Dangerdoc]

Thanks, but that number means nothing to me.

 

Can you elaborate a bit please.

 

Ta.

 

Doc

[HYMN AND MI]

Go to PATAS website and click on Register of Appeals, then br0wse and type in the number, then click on the number top left, underlined.

 

http://www.patasregistersofappeals.org.uk/

[HYMN AND MI]

Sorry, click Search not Browse!

[HYMN AND MI]

OK? Did that work as I have to go? Please post up a draft for advice.

[Dangerdoc]

Fantastic, just reviewed it. Ideal indeed.

 

I will upload my, rather long, letter to Merton Council and you can let me know if it's about right (ish) in a bit.

 

Doc

[HYMN AND MI]

OK. I will view later tonight as I must go to work. By the way, I saw another possibly useful case last week involving someone pulling over as a passenger was ill or something and will try and find it later. I do have the case but just need to find the piece of paper!

[HYMN AND MI]

I would just simply state that you are challenging the alleged contravention on the ground that it did not occur because the authority has failed to maintain the signage in place as per your photographic evidence and the law: attach and quote. Should you not accept this representation, I require you to provide me with the Traffic Management Order in pdf, with all schedules and amendments, all photographic evidence showing my vehicle passing through any signage, all detailed notes of the officer who decided to issue the PCN and details of the last time the sugnage was inspected.

 

For starters!