DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 126108--------------------------------------------------
Re: Tower hamlets PCN 33H - using a restricted route for buses
and cycles only
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: July 28, 2026, 2:59 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: tincombe link ---
>
> Whether you used 100 ft or 500ft, you used the route. You do
not have to traverse the whole route.
>
> IMO, their interpretation is correct and your argument goes to
mitigation only which the adjudicator may not consider.
>
--- End Quote ---
Well, you may be right, but for me, "use" means for a purpose,
so by going along a road, you are using it to get somewhere, but
in this case, the route was not "used" because the motorist
turned round and went another way. No doubt the adjudicators
agree with you, but I think they are wrong. Of course if it was
an offence just to pass the sign, like a No Entry sign, it's
another matter.
#Post#: 126994--------------------------------------------------
Re: Tower hamlets PCN 33H - using a restricted route for buses
and cycles only
DIR By: Movieman9000
Date: August 6, 2026, 3:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Incandescent link ---
>
> [quote author=tincombe link=topic=11260.msg126088#msg126088
date=1785263787]
> Whether you used 100 ft or 500ft, you used the route. You do
not have to traverse the whole route.
>
> IMO, their interpretation is correct and your argument goes to
mitigation only which the adjudicator may not consider.
>
--- End Quote ---
Well, you may be right, but for me, "use" means for a purpose,
so by going along a road, you are using it to get somewhere, but
in this case, the route was not "used" because the motorist
turned round and went another way. No doubt the adjudicators
agree with you, but I think they are wrong. Of course if it was
an offence just to pass the sign, like a No Entry sign, it's
another matter.
[/quote]
Look at the different contraventions.
For example:
Code 31
Entering and stopping in a box junction.
Code 53
Entering a pedestrian zone.
Code 32
Failing to proceed in the direction shown.
Code 33
Using a route restricted to certain vehicles.
it's quite clear if they wish to penalise entering and using
#Post#: 126995--------------------------------------------------
Re: Tower hamlets PCN 33H - using a restricted route for buses
and cycles only
DIR By: Movieman9000
Date: August 6, 2026, 3:06 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Incandescent link ---
>
> [quote author=tincombe link=topic=11260.msg126088#msg126088
date=1785263787]
> Whether you used 100 ft or 500ft, you used the route. You do
not have to traverse the whole route.
>
> IMO, their interpretation is correct and your argument goes to
mitigation only which the adjudicator may not consider.
>
--- End Quote ---
Well, you may be right, but for me, "use" means for a purpose,
so by going along a road, you are using it to get somewhere, but
in this case, the route was not "used" because the motorist
turned round and went another way. No doubt the adjudicators
agree with you, but I think they are wrong. Of course if it was
an offence just to pass the sign, like a No Entry sign, it's
another matter.
[/quote]
Look at the different contraventions.
For example:
Code 31
Entering and stopping in a box junction.
Code 53
Entering a pedestrian zone.
Code 32
Failing to proceed in the direction shown.
Code 33
Using a route restricted to certain vehicles.
it's quite clear if they wish to penalise entering and using
in this case surely even if we go by the spirit of the law , the
aim of the 33H is to not use the road as a through route
#Post#: 127008--------------------------------------------------
Re: Tower hamlets PCN 33H - using a restricted route for buses
and cycles only
DIR By: tincombe
Date: August 6, 2026, 5:18 am
---------------------------------------------------------
We are not the arbiters in this matter. You must put your
arguments to the adjudicator.
Reduced payment offer ends on 11 Aug, the 28-day period on 25th.
You are placing great weight on something which you recollect
but have not seen. They've offered to provide the full video and
yet you've not triggered this. You have plenty of time because
an appeal would not be heard for many weeks/months. At this
stage, all you need to do is register your appeal, collecting
additional evidence can be done in parallel and referenced in
your submission.
#Post#: 127797--------------------------------------------------
Re: Tower hamlets PCN 33H - using a restricted route for buses
and cycles only
DIR By: Movieman9000
Date: August 14, 2026, 9:12 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Update
I paid today as the balance showed £80 outstanding and i thought
it was the easier option (maybe i got lucky as i thought it was
going to be £160)
the reason i paid is my case relied on the below and the case
reference appeared very similar to mine, i share my research
below
Code 33 is defined in the statutory guidance as "Using a route
restricted to certain vehicles."
Contrast that with other codes on the same table: Code 31 is
"Entering and stopping in a box junction when prohibited" and
Code 51 is "Failing to comply with a no entry restriction."
Parliament used the word "entering" where it meant entering. For
Code 33 it chose "using." That distinction is deliberate and can
argue it directly.
Statutory language — Code 33 says "using," not "entering." You
didn't use the route.
Purpose of the restriction — Bus gates exist to prevent through
traffic. You did not travel through.
Incomplete evidence — Their own footage ends before showing how
you exited. They cannot prove a completed contravention.
ETA Register of Appeals
Register kept under Regulation 20 of the Road Traffic (Parking
Adjudicators) (London) Regulations 1993, as amended and
Regulation 17 of the Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic
Contraventions (Representations and Appeals) (England)
Regulations 2022.
Case Details
Case reference 2250210174
Appellant Salim Chowdhury
Authority London Borough of Camden
VRM GP19OZC
PCN Details
PCN CU70172658
Contravention date 04 Mar 2025
Contravention time 08:55:00
Contravention location TOTTENHAM COURT ROAD By Junction With
Howland Street
Penalty amount GBP 130.00
Contravention Using a route restricted to certain vehicles
33H
Referral date -
Decision Date 15 Jul 2025
Adjudicator Andrew Harman
Appeal decision Appeal refused
Direction Full penalty charge notice amount stated to be paid
within 28 days.
Reasons
The appellant attended the hearing of this appeal today on the
Microsoft Teams video conferencing platform.
The council did not attend the hearing, it not being expected to
do so.
The contravention alleged in this case was that this vehicle
used a route restricted to certain vehicles.
The appellant said that upon seeing the sign he reversed, he not
continuing to drive down the road.
I viewed the council's cctv footage of the incident at the
hearing, my sharing it with the appellant. I was satisfied on
that footage that the appellant's vehicle stopped on passing
signage. I did not doubt that the appellant had then reversed,
but this contravention occurs at the point at which a vehicle
passes signage, whatever remedial action the driver then takes.
I found this contravention proved.
The appellant's case amounted to mitigation only which I have no
power to take into account.
The appeal was refused.
*****************************************************
Page 4 of 4
DIR Previous Page