DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 69345--------------------------------------------------
Re: Harrow Camrose Avenue Bus Gate 33E
DIR By: Bustagate
Date: April 30, 2025, 5:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I'm posting Harrow's Adjournment Evidence, which includes the
image which I think is the one referred to. It bears the date 1
September 2024, but this isn't .exif data.
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 122255--------------------------------------------------
Re: Harrow Camrose Avenue Bus Gate 33E
DIR By: patc
Date: June 18, 2026, 1:01 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I received a PCN from Harrow at this site (eastbound) and
challenged it both at the initial appeal stage to Harrow and
then to London Tribunals.
I am a retired Traffic Engineer and so was able to write an
appeal which was based on the legitimacy of the traffic order as
it does not comply with the Traffic Signs Manual in a number of
ways. The TSM does not authorize bus gates to be used to control
one of several traffic lanes in the same direction. It may only
control all traffic in one direction or all traffic in both
directions. The layout that Harrow have used in Camrose Avenue
has used the bus gate signage to control the use of the nearside
lane and this use is not permitted. Bus gates must also have a
clearly signed route showing how traffic should pass around the
bus gate without committing an offence. This signage does not
exist. I too found that the arrows painted on the carriageway
were used in a manner that was not authorized under chapter 5 of
the Traffic Signs Manual.
When my appeal was heard by the adjudicator at London Tribunals
he did not comment on the evidential material that I sent them
(a traffic Engineers Report) and instead he managed to find a
procedural fault in the way that Harrow had corresponded with me
and so ruled in my favour based only on that point.
I was pleased on the one hand that the PCN had been cancelled,
but incensed that the adjudicator had neatly avoided any
reference to the more damming evidence that the traffic order
was without authority.
I made a number of complaints to the Chief Adjudicator on the
basis that the adjudicator had not carried out his duties
properly as he had not considered all the evidence. You would
not believe the responses that I received from him - they were
poorly written, full of spelling mistakes. Had paragraphs that
made no sense and at one point stated that the adjudicator could
base his judgment on only one point and then he need not
consider any further evidence! Thankfully the first point he
found was in my favour and so I won, but what would have
happened under different circumstances is unclear.
I asked that my traffic engineers report should be appended to
any future appeals at this location (knowing full well that hell
would freeze over before they would actually defend the public
against a rogue Local Authority) and of course they simply did
not respond to that request.
I made a freedom of information request to Harrow to ask how
much income the Bus Gate at Camrose Avenue generated and they
could only go back to 2021 and the income for only those 5 years
was in the order of £6.8M. You only have to multiply this by the
number of years that the Bus Gate order has been in operation to
see that Harrow may have received somewhere in the region of
£30M + that they were never entitled to.
If anyone reads this after they have received a PCN at this
site, I am anxious to pass on my evidential package so that it
eventually may force the hand of London Tribunals to address the
issue and deliver justice.
#Post#: 125149--------------------------------------------------
Re: Harrow Camrose Avenue Bus Gate 33E
DIR By: SimonK
Date: July 20, 2026, 6:11 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi Patc
I wondered if you would possibly consider sharing your evidence
here.
I drove through the same bus gate accidentally last night. It
was dark, I'm not used to the area and I really didn't expect to
see such an odd restriction in a residential area. By the time I
had seen the sign and understood it, another car was behind me
and had boxed me in and stopping me from reversing. That car
also followed me through the restriction.
In 30 years of driving I have never come across a bus gate with
a width restriction in the middle. But the fact there were no
advance warnings added to the confusion.
I don't know if I'll receive a fine yet, but would like to
prepare as much evidence as possible for an appeal.
Thanks
Simon
--- Quote from: patc link ---
>
> I received a PCN from Harrow at this site (eastbound) and
challenged it both at the initial appeal stage to Harrow and
then to London Tribunals.
>
> I am a retired Traffic Engineer and so was able to write an
appeal which was based on the legitimacy of the traffic order as
it does not comply with the Traffic Signs Manual in a number of
ways. The TSM does not authorize bus gates to be used to control
one of several traffic lanes in the same direction. It may only
control all traffic in one direction or all traffic in both
directions. The layout that Harrow have used in Camrose Avenue
has used the bus gate signage to control the use of the nearside
lane and this use is not permitted. Bus gates must also have a
clearly signed route showing how traffic should pass around the
bus gate without committing an offence. This signage does not
exist. I too found that the arrows painted on the carriageway
were used in a manner that was not authorized under chapter 5 of
the Traffic Signs Manual.
>
> When my appeal was heard by the adjudicator at London
Tribunals he did not comment on the evidential material that I
sent them (a traffic Engineers Report) and instead he managed to
find a procedural fault in the way that Harrow had corresponded
with me and so ruled in my favour based only on that point.
>
> I was pleased on the one hand that the PCN had been cancelled,
but incensed that the adjudicator had neatly avoided any
reference to the more damming evidence that the traffic order
was without authority.
>
> I made a number of complaints to the Chief Adjudicator on the
basis that the adjudicator had not carried out his duties
properly as he had not considered all the evidence. You would
not believe the responses that I received from him - they were
poorly written, full of spelling mistakes. Had paragraphs that
made no sense and at one point stated that the adjudicator could
base his judgment on only one point and then he need not
consider any further evidence! Thankfully the first point he
found was in my favour and so I won, but what would have
happened under different circumstances is unclear.
>
> I asked that my traffic engineers report should be appended to
any future appeals at this location (knowing full well that hell
would freeze over before they would actually defend the public
against a rogue Local Authority) and of course they simply did
not respond to that request.
>
> I made a freedom of information request to Harrow to ask how
much income the Bus Gate at Camrose Avenue generated and they
could only go back to 2021 and the income for only those 5 years
was in the order of £6.8M. You only have to multiply this by the
number of years that the Bus Gate order has been in operation to
see that Harrow may have received somewhere in the region of
£30M + that they were never entitled to.
>
> If anyone reads this after they have received a PCN at this
site, I am anxious to pass on my evidential package so that it
eventually may force the hand of London Tribunals to address the
issue and deliver justice.
>
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 125189--------------------------------------------------
Re: Harrow Camrose Avenue Bus Gate 33E
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: July 20, 2026, 9:38 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I have a hearing on Wednesday a.m. if anyone wishes to observe.
I am representing. You can call the Tribunal and simply ask for
an observation request.
#Post#: 125193--------------------------------------------------
Re: Harrow Camrose Avenue Bus Gate 33E
DIR By: SimonK
Date: July 20, 2026, 9:52 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Having spent a few hours researching the winning appeals on the
tribunal website, one thing is very interesting...
The council's video camera faces the rear of the traffic signs
so the details on the signs are not visible (and instead relying
on outdated Google Maps images). Adjudicators have ruled against
Harrow council when their is an onus on the council to prove
whether the sign was visible, especially during low visibility
conditions.
On a separate thought, I'm surprised Google have not sued
councils for using their map data free of charge.
#Post#: 125370--------------------------------------------------
Re: Harrow Camrose Avenue Bus Gate 33E
DIR By: SimonK
Date: July 22, 2026, 5:55 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Hippocrates link ---
>
> I have a hearing on Wednesday a.m. if anyone wishes to
observe. I am representing. You can call the Tribunal and simply
ask for an observation request.
>
--- End Quote ---
Good luck! I hope you win.
#Post#: 125437--------------------------------------------------
Re: Harrow Camrose Avenue Bus Gate 33E
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: July 22, 2026, 5:59 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: SimonK link ---
>
> [quote author=Hippocrates link=topic=3471.msg125189#msg125189
date=1784558311]
> I have a hearing on Wednesday a.m. if anyone wishes to
observe. I am representing. You can call the Tribunal and simply
ask for an observation request.
>
--- End Quote ---
Good luck! I hope you win.
[/quote]
We did thanks! 2260060952. The appellant did most of the work.
8) Decision later today! 29 minutes.
#Post#: 125440--------------------------------------------------
Re: Harrow Camrose Avenue Bus Gate 33E
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: July 22, 2026, 6:11 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=9886]SimonK[/member] please start your own thread and I
will assist. This is not a criticism but we need to know where
we are with each case as they are all different. The adjudicator
also mentioned a flaw in the NOR.
*****************************************************
Page 5 of 5
DIR Previous Page