DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 57820--------------------------------------------------
Re: HARROW - Charlton Rd - PCN s38L - width restriction lack of
signage
DIR By: Bustagate
Date: February 12, 2025, 8:45 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Harrow has made The Harrow (Prescribed Route) (Width
Restriction) Traffic Order 2007 (as amended)
HTML https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/harrow_width_restriction_tmos/response/2866464/attach/2/8814463%202007%2007%20AMND.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1.<br
/>Under this, the only vehicles allowed to pass northbound or
southbound
--- Quote ---
> between the two island sites situated between a point 1.50
metres north of a point opposite the party wall of Nos. 22 and
24 Charlton Road and a point 1.50 metres south of a point
opposite that party wall.
>
--- End Quote ---
are
--- Quote ---
> (a) any vehicle being used for ambulance, fire brigade or
police purposes;
> (b) anything done with the permission or at the direction of
a police constable in uniform;
> (c) any person who causes any vehicle to proceed in
accordance with any restriction or requirement indicated by
traffic signs placed pursuant to section 66 or section 67 of the
Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984;
> (d) any vehicle specified in column 6 of the Schedule to this
Order;
> (e) to any vehicle being lawfully used in connection with the
maintenance of public services maintained by the London Borough
of Harrow. [LBH2012/30]
>
--- End Quote ---
Under Regulation 18 of the Local Authority’s Traffic Orders
(Procedure)(England and Wales) Regulations 1996
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1996/2489/regulation/18,
a
local authority which has made a traffic order shall secure:
--- Quote ---
> (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; ...
>
--- End Quote ---
Harrow met this requirement by placing a gate across that
section of road. On each side of the gate there was a
600mm-diameter No Entry sign at its centre. In each direction,
on the bollard to the right of the gate there was a small No
Entry sign. Between October 2009 and October 2012 the gate was
replaced with another gate which had red-and-white stripes
across the top bar but which did not have a No Entry sign fixed
to it. That gate was removed between March 2019 and November
2020. Between October 2022 and May 2024 the No Entry sign was
removed from the bollards in each direction to the right of
where the gate had been. That space on the bollards is now
white.
It appears to me that Harrow has failed to maintain signage in
accordance with its obligations. When the gate was removed, I
would have expected Harrow to reinstate a 600mm-diameter "No
Entry" sign in each direction to face oncoming traffic. That
could have been on a pole on the traffic island to the right of
the width restriction. As there would then be a pole on the
traffic island, I would expect them also to install a
600mm-diameter Keep Left sign as well. For good measure, they
could add a Traffic Enforcement Camera sign. Then motorists
would be adequately informed of the restriction which is in
place and of the consequences of violating it.
I realise that, given the width of her car and the height of the
post at the right of the width restriction, the OP would
probably have gone through the centre anyway. But I hope this
post will help others caught by Harrow's inadequate signage of
such gaps between traffic islands at width restrictions.
As Harrow formerly considered it requisite at this location to
have a gate, a 600mm-diameter No Entry sign and a small No Entry
sign on a bollard, they will have difficulty explaining why now
none of those is required.
#Post#: 57989--------------------------------------------------
Re: HARROW - Charlton Rd - PCN s38L - width restriction lack of
signage
DIR By: Bustagate
Date: February 13, 2025, 12:10 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
May I present you with the perfect counter-example to Harrow's
38L contraventions on Charlton Road? The image below is from the
width restriction on Headstone Lane. The difference here is that
cycles and taxis, as well as buses, can use the central lane
between the two traffic islands.
Harrow have signed this with Keep Left signs on the bollards on
both traffic islands. So a vehicle passing through the central
lane is passing to the right of the Keep Left sign on the left
bollard.
By the logic of the PCNs issued for Charlton Road, anyone
passing to the right of the Keep Left sign on the left bollard
has committed a 38L contravention. While those who are not
driving a taxi, bus or riding a cycle will also have committed a
33E, what possible reason can Harrow deploy to explain why they
aren't issuing 38L's to the drivers of buses and taxis (cyclists
would be a bit difficult)?
There is a solution, but Harrow haven't used it: a proper
600mm-diameter Keep Left sign with an "Except buses, cycles and
taxis" plate below it on a pole on the left traffic island.
They'd need authorisation from DfT, but they've needed that for
other schemes, including putting up signs with a hedgehog.
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 59883--------------------------------------------------
Re: HARROW - Charlton Rd - PCN s38L - width restriction lack of
signage
DIR By: Bustagate
Date: February 27, 2025, 9:18 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Keep Left/Right Signs on Bollards
I have now found a definitive statement from the Department for
Transport that it is "never appropriate" to put Keep Left/Right
signs on bollards where it is intended that some vehicles should
pass on the "other" side. It is in Traffic Advisory Leaflet
3/13: Traffic bollards and low level
traffic signs
HTML https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7c0650e5274a7202e19128/traffic-bollards-low-level.pdf.<br
/>On page 11 there is a section about "Cycle gaps". These are
where there is a build-out and traffic in one direction is
forced to give way to traffic coming in the other direction. In
some cases the build-out is actually an island and the gap
between the island and the footway is wide enough for cycles to
pass through. This is a "cycle gap". TAL 3/13 advises:
--- Quote ---
> Where a traffic island is used to create a cycle gap, it is
never appropriate to use a keep left/right sign on the
> island.
>
> The keep right sign in Figure 15 essentially prohibits
cyclists from using the cycle gap and a plain traffic bollard
> would have been more appropriate
--- End Quote ---
The reason that the Keep Right sign is inappropriate at the
cycle gap is that the only vehicles (including pedal cycles)
which may pass to its left are those listed in TSRGD 2016
Schedule 3 Part 4 Paragraph 3
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/3/part/4/paragraph/3/made<br
/>(the emergency services plus some related ones).
Figure 15 is at the bottom of this post.
Passing the Bollards on Charlton Road
The same argument applies to vehicles passing to the right of
the Keep Left signs on Charlton Road. Bin lorries providing
services to residents of Charlton Road are required to obey the
sign. If they cannot, they must turn round or reverse back.
If Harrow Borough Council does not issue 38L PCNs to bin lorries
and other vehicles which use the central lane, it breaks a
fundamental rule of administrative law: that in its actions a
public authority must not take account of irrelevant
considerations. In issuing 38L PCNs, Harrow is using powers
granted to it under Section 4 of the London Local Authorities
and Transport for London Act 2003
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/2003/3/section/4/enacted
in
respect of contraventions of Section 36 of the Road Traffic Act
1988
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/36.
There's
nothing in RTA 1988 about TMOs which may permit other vehicles
to use a lane to the right of a Keep Left sign. In any case,
Harrow's TMO only permits its vehicles to use the central lane
if they are being "lawfully used", which they aren't if they are
disobeying a traffic sign.
The consequence of breaking this fundamental rule is that the
public authority's actions are ultra vires (beyond its powers).
The courts strike them down as unlawful. While it requires
Judicial Review (which doesn't come cheap) to obtain such a
declaration, Adjudicators should understand the principle and
entertain the argument.
Wrong Signage
This argument only arises because Harrow has been using the
wrong signage at the restrictions. To paraphrase the advice of
Traffic Advisory Leaflet 3/13: it is never appropriate to use
Keep Left/Right signs where it is intended that "special"
vehicles should be permitted to pass the sign on the other side.
The correct approach is to leave the bollard blank.
That doesn't mean that the TMO is unenforceable. On the
contrary, Regulation 18 of The Local Authorities' Traffic Orders
(Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1996/2489/regulation/18<br
/>(LATOR) imposes this duty:
--- Quote ---
> 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;
--- End Quote ---
Google Street View shows that in 2008 there was a gate across
the central lane with 600mm-diameter No Entry Signs and a plate
which read "EMERGENCY ACCESS // DO NOT OBSTRUCT". It is
permitted to have a gate across the highway, provided it is not
locked. The obligation under Regulation 18 of LATOR refers only
to traffic signs, so the locking of the gate didn't count.
Harrow evidently considered that the "requisite" signage to make
adequate information available to persons using the road was to
put 600mm-diameter No Entry signs on the gate across the central
lane. That also avoided complaints about its obstructing the
highway by locking the gate.
By 2012, Harrow had replaced the gate with another one which
didn't have the No Entry signs but which did have a
red-and-white-striped top rail.
2012 Update to the TMO
The TMOs for Charlton Road have always allowed use of the
central lane by the emergency services. In 2012 Harrow made
Traffic Order LBH 2012/30 which added
(e) any vehicle being lawfully used in connection with the
maintenance of public services maintained by the London Borough
of Harrow.
As noted above, this TMO only allows vehicles which are being
"lawfully used" to use the central lane. If there is a Keep Left
sign to the left of the lane, any vehicle using it (other than
an emergency services vehicle) is not acting lawfully. If there
isn't a Keep Left sign to its left, vehicles on Harrow business
can use it.
Removal of the Gate
When Harrow removed the gate between 2019 and 2020, the absence
of proper signage of the restriction on the central lane became
glaring. The proper signage would have been No Entry (or
possibly No Vehicles) signs with "Except authorised vehicles"
plates on poles on the traffic islands. The bollards on either
side would then have been left blank.
The hatching which Harrow put across the central lane has a
broken border and is to diagram 1040 (item 23 in TSRGD 2016
Schedule 11 Part 4
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/11/part/4/made).<br
/>It means
--- Quote ---
> Part of the carriageway which vehicular traffic should not
enter unless it is seen by the driver to be safe to do so
--- End Quote ---
Rather than use the correct signage (which would have required
special permission from the Department for Transport for the
"Except authorised vehicles" plates), Harrow chose to use the
wrong signage - Keep Left signs on the bollards at the traffic
islands - and issue PCNs selectively.
Challenging Harrow's Actions
It will be interesting to see how Adjudicators respond to this
argument, if it is deployed by someone who gets a 38L on
Charlton Road.
As to those who have already paid, I see parallels between this
and sub-postmasters who were bankrupted when the Post Office
sued them for losses reported by the Horizon system. It took
many years for those wrongs to be righted. I hope it doesn't
take as long here.
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 68439--------------------------------------------------
Re: HARROW - Charlton Rd - PCN s38L - width restriction lack of
signage
DIR By: nm1827
Date: April 24, 2025, 8:07 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=3617]Bustagate[/member] firstly, thank you so much for
your research into this. This has come back, now with a Notice
of Enforcement from Newlyn PLC so I will indeed be able to use
the informative legislation references you have found to mount a
challenge
#Post#: 68558--------------------------------------------------
Re: HARROW - Charlton Rd - PCN s38L - width restriction lack of
signage
DIR By: Bustagate
Date: April 25, 2025, 4:01 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I hope my advice is of help to you. Don't raise your hopes too
far: it will still be a struggle.
I'm puzzled as to what the Notice of Enforcement is from NEWLYN
PLC. Did you make representations which Harrow dismissed? Did
you appeal to the London Tribunals? Make sure you've got the
documents which Harrow have sent you and that you have recorded
when you received them.
There are precise rules about the periods for making
representations and appeals which Harrow interpret to their own
advantage: they try to run the clock from when they issue a
document, counting it as day 1. The rules are that it's the day
when you receive the document which is when the notice is
served. By a legal convention, the day when a document is
received is day 0. It's much better not to rely on this.
#Post#: 68701--------------------------------------------------
Re: HARROW - Charlton Rd - PCN s38L - width restriction lack of
signage
DIR By: nm1827
Date: April 25, 2025, 2:51 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=3617]Bustagate[/member] I admit that I did not either
appeal to Harrow Council, nor to London Tribunals. I had given
birth to a baby at around the time I received the PCN and in all
honesty I forgot about it.
#Post#: 68708--------------------------------------------------
Re: HARROW - Charlton Rd - PCN s38L - width restriction lack of
signage
DIR By: Bustagate
Date: April 25, 2025, 4:21 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Congratulations! It sounds as though you've given priority to
what really matters: your baby.
It sounds as though you've missed all the deadlines, so you're
out of time on all types of challenge and Harrow have now passed
the debt to debt collectors, I suggest that you let them and
Harrow know immediately that you had just given birth when you
received the PCN and that that's why you haven't responded in a
timely fashion. See if they'll agree to not charging you all the
extras which they otherwise will be.
Harrow don't normally show any mercy. but here's hoping that in
these circumstances they do.
#Post#: 68729--------------------------------------------------
Re: HARROW - Charlton Rd - PCN s38L - width restriction lack of
signage
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: April 26, 2025, 3:06 am
---------------------------------------------------------
With respect, NO.
Congratulations, but the law can be a cold-hearted juggernaut
and you're already suffering the consequences of not following
procedures, so pl don't make things even worse.
Post the Notice of Enforcement or at least tell us when it was
issued, the latest date for payment and the total, including the
£75 enforcement fee.
If you do not pay by the stated date then £235 may be added to
the debt. I suspect you have better uses for this.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 2
DIR Previous Page