DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 59288--------------------------------------------------
34j - Being in a bus lane - camera enforcement - Shepherds Bush
Rd Southbound Offside
DIR By: LeFronge
Date: February 22, 2025, 6:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Yup - I got stung by this one! Which doing a quick search on
here seems to be quite well known. This is my first PCN, having
only been a driver now for around 12 months.
The advice on the previous posts about this was to make a new
post myself for what I'm hoping is a successful appeal of the
notice.
In terms of the incident itself: I am following the flow of
traffic and follow two cars and a cyclist into the lane - im
sure all got penalties too!
I've seen there are a lot of grounds to dispute this and see
this overturned, but want advice on how to do so if there is
anything specific that's required for my case - I have the
footage of the incident in question and happy to send on if it
helps shape the argument for the notice to be overturned.
Thank you in advance!
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 59292--------------------------------------------------
Re: 34j - Being in a bus lane - camera enforcement - Shepherd
Bush Rd Southbound Offside
DIR By: John U.K.
Date: February 22, 2025, 6:21 am
---------------------------------------------------------
For meaningful advice please to have a read of
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/read-this-first-before-posting-your-case!-this-section-is-for-council-tfl-dartme/
and post up here
all sides of the PCN - only redact yr name & address,
any Council photos/video, and
a GSV link to the location.,
#Post#: 59316--------------------------------------------------
Re: 34j - Being in a bus lane - camera enforcement - Shepherds
Bush Rd Southbound Offside
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: February 22, 2025, 8:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=4535]LeFronge[/member] I will PM you my details as I
have much DFT info on this case and have won 2 out of 2
recently.
The signage is bonkers, contradicts the TSM Chapter Three - by
the DFT - and reminds me of Eric to Andre: "I am playing the
right notes but not necessarily in the right order."
#Post#: 63687--------------------------------------------------
Re: 34j - Being in a bus lane - camera enforcement - Shepherds
Bush Rd Southbound Offside
DIR By: Bustagate
Date: March 22, 2025, 4:44 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hammersmith & Fulham may have passed a TMO which declares that a
section of Shepherds Bush Road is a bus lane but 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) then obliges them to
--- Quote ---
> 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 ---
The most important (regulatory) traffic signs for a bus lane are
prescribed in Schedule 9 of The Traffic Signs Regulations and
General Directions 2016
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/9/made:
- diagram 959B (start of with-flow bus lane; item 10 of Part 4)
or diagram 960 (start of contraflow bus lane; item 8 of Part 4)
- diagram 964 (end of bus lane; item 11 of part 4)
- diagram 1048 ("BUS LANE" road marking; item 14 of Part 6)
- diagram 1049A (continuous thick white longitudinal line used
as boundary of the bus lane; item 11 of Part 6)
Of these, diagram 959B is the most important. It specifies the
vehicles which are permitted to be in the bus lane. These are
shown as pictographs or as the word "taxi". If the bus lane does
not operate at all times, it also shows when the bus lane is in
operation. Section 9.3 of Chapter 3 of the Traffic Signs Manual
HTML https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5c78f895e5274a0ebfec719b/traffic-signs-manual-chapter-03.pdf<br
/>sets out how with-flow bus lanes should be signed:
--- Quote ---
> 9.3.2. The bus lane is separated from the rest of the
carriageway by a continuous line to diagram 1049A
(S9‑6‑11). The width of the line is 250 or 300 mm
depending upon site conditions, particularly the width of road
available.
>
> 9.3.5. The sign to diagram 959B is a regulatory sign and
should be placed as near as practicable to the start of the
lane, i.e. where the continuous line to diagram 1049A begins.
>
> 9.3.8. The road marking “BUS LANE” to diagram 1048 is used to
indicate all types of with‑flow bus lanes, including those
where other vehicles are allowed. The marking should normally be
placed at the beginning of the lane, i.e. where the line to
diagram 1049A commences.
--- End Quote ---
Chapter 3 of the Traffic Signs Manual doesn't provide details
for offside with-flow bus lanes as these cannot be established
by highway authorities without special permission from the
Department for Transport, which approves each application (and
requires the correct signage to be shown on the plans, which the
highway authority is then required to follow).
As well as the regulatory signs, there are advisory signs which
inform road users about the forthcoming bus lane. They are in
Schedule 11 of The Traffic Signs Regulations and General
Directions 2016
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/11/made
- diagram 958 (with-flow bus lane ahead; item 37 of Part 2)
- diagram 1010 (dashed thick white line on a 1:10 taper to the
start of the bus lane; item 10 of Part 4) - N.B. the taper isn't
part of the bus lane: it helps guide road users away from the
lane which transforms into a bus lane at the words "BUS LANE" on
the carriageway
- diagram 1014 (curved arrow; item 14 of Part 4)
There was a very important case concerning bus lanes which went
to judicial review in 2010, R (Oxfordshire County Council) v The
Bus Lane Adjudicator
HTML https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2010/894.html<br
/>[2010] EWHC 894 (Admin). In his judgment, Mr Justice Beatson
found at paragraph 65:
--- Quote ---
> The Defendant's submission that the fact that signs are
prescribed or authorised does not mean they are sufficient for
securing adequate information as to the effect of an order is
made available to road users is clearly correct. If the signs do
not in fact provide adequate information no offence is
committed; see James v Cavey [1967] 2 QB 676. Such information
is a requirement and, as Jackson J stated in R (Barnett LBC) v
Parking Adjudicator [2006] EWHC 2357 (Admin) at [41], if the
statutory conditions are not met the financial liability does
not arise.
--- End Quote ---
This case was in the High Court, which means that it sets
precedent for lower tribunals, such as bus lane adjudicators.
What this means is that if the signage isn't adequate, there is
no contravention and no financial liability.
On Shepherds Bush Road there doesn't appear to be a diagram 959B
at the start of the bus lane. That really is the beginning and
the end of it. None of the preceding advisory signage can make
up for a fundamental failure to display the single regulatory
sign which specifies where the bus lane starts, the vehicles
which can use it and its hours of operation.
This has been going on for years. I don't understand how
Hammersmith & Fulham can issue PCNs when they've failed to
install a diagram 959B at the start of the bus lane as defined
in the TMO. It looks to me like fraud by misrepresentation.
#Post#: 63703--------------------------------------------------
Re: 34j - Being in a bus lane - camera enforcement - Shepherds
Bush Rd Southbound Offside
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: March 22, 2025, 7:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Because they have DFT authorisation since 2006.
#Post#: 63722--------------------------------------------------
Re: 34j - Being in a bus lane - camera enforcement - Shepherds
Bush Rd Southbound Offside
DIR By: Bustagate
Date: March 22, 2025, 10:13 am
---------------------------------------------------------
H&F's plan showed two sections of "KEEP CLEAR" road markings
with the diagram 958 in the middle of the southern of the two,
followed by a 1:5 taper. Instead the "KEEP CLEAR" road markings
are absent, the diagram 958 is in the middle of what should be
the first "KEEP CLEAR" road marking and there's a 1:10 taper.
Another issue concerns the road markings between northbound and
southbound traffic. The authorised plan shows a solid line
separating these over the entire length of the plan. That's
never valid. Standard practice for offside bus lanes is to use
diagram 1049A on the outside of the lead-in taper to the bus
lane as well as on the outside of the bus lane itself with
warning lines elsewhere. What has been implemented are warning
lines everywhere.
As the road markings are not in accordance with the special
authorisation from DfT, it follows that H&F cannot invoke that
authorisation for the markings which are present. The usual
regulations in TSRGD apply. As the road markings appear to
predate TSRGD 2016, they come under TSRGD 2002. That used
General Directions to implement a bundle of diagrams 1048, 1049
(looks the same as diagram 1049A) and either 959 or 960: either
you had all of them or you had none. So the absence of diagram
959 invalidates diagrams 1048 and 1049. None of the regulatory
signage is in accordance with TSRGD. All H&F are left with are
diagram 958, the lead-in taper and the deflection arrow.
We come back to Mr Justice Bateson's remarks in [2010]
EWHC(Admin) 894,
--- Quote ---
> If the signs do not in fact provide adequate information no
offence is committed;
--- End Quote ---
In that case he was considering the possibility that the signs
could be valid but not adequate. In this case there is no valid
regulatory signage, only some advisory signage. That hardly
suffices as adequate information about an offside bus lane.
That's if there actually is an offside bus lane. I'm not
convinced that there is. They can only be created by special
authorisation from DfT. Although DfT has authorised H&F's
proposals, H&F haven't implemented those proposals. I'd say the
offside bus lane was pending. Given the lapse of time and the
change of TSRGD, I doubt whether H&F could now invoke DfT's 2006
authorisation.
#Post#: 63759--------------------------------------------------
Re: 34j - Being in a bus lane - camera enforcement - Shepherds
Bush Rd Southbound Offside
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: March 22, 2025, 4:06 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The basic problem with Regulation 18 is use of the word
"adequate". One man's 'adequate' is another's 'inadequate'. The
council would say it's all adequate even if there were no signs
there at all !!
#Post#: 63763--------------------------------------------------
Re: 34j - Being in a bus lane - camera enforcement - Shepherds
Bush Rd Southbound Offside
DIR By: Bustagate
Date: March 22, 2025, 5:08 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I agree that "adequate" is a matter of interpretation. But Mr
Justice Beatson actually went quite a long way in analysing the
adequacy of Oxford's signage. The trouble is that those could be
regarded as obiter dicta rather than binding precedent.
With Shepherds Bush Road, however, I would emphasise two points:
- the failure to place the signage in accordance with the
authorised plan and the absence of a diagram 959 next to the
offside bus lane means that neither the "BUS LANE" road marking
nor the thick white line has been placed lawfully. They must
form no part of the assessment of the adequacy of the signage;
- the omission of the "KEEP CLEAR" road markings and the
misplacement of the diagram 958 severely reduce the likelihood
that drivers emerging from the outside lane and heading for the
inside lane will see the diagram 958.
It follows that if the approved plans represent DfT's views as
to what constitutes adequate signage for this bus lane, what H&F
have placed there falls far below it.
#Post#: 63803--------------------------------------------------
Re: 34j - Being in a bus lane - camera enforcement - Shepherds
Bush Rd Southbound Offside
DIR By: Bustagate
Date: March 23, 2025, 9:26 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I've checked the location of the diagram 958 and consider that
it's actually been put where it was meant to be put. That
doesn't invalidate the argument about the inadequacy of the
signage.
The fact remains that the "KEEP CLEAR" road markings are absent.
They ensured that the roadway was kept clear between the end of
the nearside bus lane and the start of the lead-in taper to the
offside bus lane:
- Bus drivers would not move from the bus stop until they could
proceed straight to the outside lane beyond the second "KEEP
CLEAR" marking.
- Other drivers would be held in the outside southbound lane
next to the bus stop until they could move beyond the second
"KEEP CLEAR" marking. When they reached the bus stop sign, they
would have a view of the road in front of them which consisted
of the two "KEEP CLEAR" road markings, the lead-in taper to the
offside bus lane, the "BUS LANE" road marking in the outside
lane and the thick white line separating the offside bus lane
from the inside lane. If they looked, they would also have an
uninterrupted view of the diagram 958 on the footway beside the
middle of the second "KEEP CLEAR" marking.
In the absence of the "KEEP CLEAR" road markings, drivers do not
have the uninterrupted view of the road ahead which DfT
specified had to be provided as part of the markings for the
offside bus lane.
Therein lies the inadequacy of the signage.
Hammersmith and Fulham's mulcting of motorists has arisen from
their failure to implement the road markings which were part of
the consent for the offside bus lane. They have succeeded in
doing this because the plan DfT approved has not been readily
available. It is attached to this post.
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 63850--------------------------------------------------
Re: 34j - Being in a bus lane - camera enforcement - Shepherds
Bush Rd Southbound Offside
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: March 23, 2025, 1:15 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
They have changed the signage over the years.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page