URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 58160--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Harrow, code 33E using a restricted route, Headstone Lane
   DIR By: Bustagate
       Date: February 14, 2025, 2:25 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Thanks. The width restriction is VERY close to the left turn.
       There's also no advance warning of it when you're driving along
       Melbourne Avenue, so it's a complete surprise when you reach the
       junction, look left and think "What the hell is that? How do I
       get through?".
       I've been looking into this scheme and the one on Camrose
       Avenue. They both date from 1976 and both were designed to have
       electronically-controlled rising barriers (red-and-white-striped
       poles) on the bus lane(s), which made them self-policing. Each
       has a junction immediately before the restriction which makes
       turning left into the width restriction very difficult. I
       understand that locals tend to pull out as if to turn right from
       the side road and then do a sharp left to get a better approach
       to the width restriction. If you don't know what's about to hit
       you (and why should you, given there's no
       sign?), you face a choice between damaging your car and paying
       Harrow's fee.
       Harrow's motto is "Putting residents first". They do that by
       levying a tax on non-residents, who lack the knowledge to
       negotiate the traps which they have laid in their road system.
       #Post#: 64271--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Harrow, code 33E using a restricted route, Headstone Lane
   DIR By: Bustagate
       Date: March 26, 2025, 1:09 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       A note to anyone who gets a PCN on Headstone Lane: the TMO is
       nonsense, so I can't see how Harrow can enforce it.
       The Harrow (Bus Priority) Traffic Order 2016
  HTML https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/harrow_width_restriction_tmos/response/2867517/attach/2/8814463%202016%2039%20AMND.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1<br
       />defines the restricted section of road as:
       --- Quote ---
       > the carriageway which lies between the island site situated
       between a point 6.00 metres north-east of the extended
       north-eastern kerb-line of Melbourne Avenue and a point 9.00
       metres north-east of that point.
       --- End Quote ---
       Let's define
       AA = "a point 6.00 metres north-east of the extended
       north-eastern kerb-line of Melbourne Avenue"
       BB = "a point 9.00 metres north-east of that point"
       Then the TMO is specifying:
       --- Quote ---
       > the carriageway which lies between the island site situated
       between AA and BB.
       --- End Quote ---
       Some questions:
       - What is "the island site"?
       - The definition of BB by reference to the point AA makes sense,
       but how is the point AA defined by reference to "the extended
       north-eastern kerb-line of Melbourne Avenue"? That's a line, not
       a point.
       Let's suppose that we manage to resolve those questions. We
       define:
       CC = "the island site situated between AA and BB"
       Now the TMO's specification of the restricted section of road
       is:
       --- Quote ---
       > the carriageway which lies between CC.
       --- End Quote ---
       I defy anyone to explain how this is a legally-robust definition
       of anything, let alone a section of road from which Harrow
       Council makes £500,000 a year.
       If there isn't a valid TMO (or rather, that part of the TMO for
       Headstone Lane is invalid), Harrow can't just brush this off.
       Southwark Council has just been forced to refund a load of PCNs
  HTML https://southwarknews.co.uk/area/rotherhithe/exclusive-council-to-refund-over-100k-to-drivers-wrongly-fined-at-lower-road-bus-lane/<br
       />because they had an experimental TMO which expired and they
       didn't put a new one in place but continued to issue PCNs when
       there wasn't a TMO.
       *****************************************************
       Page 3 of 3
   DIR Previous Page