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#: 86250--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Redbridge, 53j - restriction on vehicles entering a
       pedestrian zone, Sydney road, Perrymans farm road,
   DIR By: flash2005
       Date: August 19, 2025, 3:00 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       There are only these 5 options to select in the appeal.  Which
       one should be selected here, as the procedural impropriety
       option is missing
       •
       occur ☐
       •
       ☐
       •
       the control of someone without my consent ☐
       •
       circumstances of the case ☐
       •
       for a period of less than six months. ☐
       #Post#: 86251--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Redbridge, 53j - restriction on vehicles entering a
       pedestrian zone, Sydney road, Perrymans farm road,
   DIR By: flash2005
       Date: August 19, 2025, 3:05 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Incandescent link ---
       >
       > As far as I can see there is nothing wrong or inadequate in
       your original reps, (Hippocrates said "good stuff"). However,
       the regulations for traffic signs have been studied in more
       detail since cases of very high, (even absurdly high) have
       arisen, and recommendations on traffic sign positioning are
       found in Sectio 5.1 of the Traffic Signs Manual 2018: -
       >
       > 5.4 Mounting heights
       > 5.4.1. Signs should be mounted such that the lower edge of the
       sign is generally between 900 mm and 1500 mm above the highest
       point of the adjacent carriageway. Signs mounted at the lower
       end of this range benefit from receiving the most illumination
       from vehicle headlamps, but they are also prone to soiling due
       to spray from passing vehicles. Mounting heights at the higher
       end of the range should be used where this or obscuration by
       other vehicles is likely to be a problem. Speed limit signs and
       other safety-critical signs will not normally be mounted lower
       than 1500 mm above the carriageway.
       >
       > 5.4.2. Where signs are erected above footways and cycle
       tracks, adequate clearance must be allowed for pedestrians,
       cyclists and equestrians. Interim Advice Note 195/16 ‘Cycle
       Traffic and the Strategic Road Network’ requires a minimum
       height for such structures of 2300 mm for pedestrians and 2400
       mm for cyclists. However, to minimise the environmental impact
       of signs, particularly large directional signs, consideration
       should be given to adopting lower mounting heights. A minimum
       clearance of 2100 mm should be maintained over footways, 2300 mm
       over cycle tracks or shared-use facilities and 2700 mm over
       equestrian routes.
       >
       > 5.4.3. Detailed consideration may be necessary for the
       combined effects of location and mounting height at some
       junctions in order to take account of the differing eye heights
       of drivers of cars, lorries and other road users. The aim is to
       optimise the benefits and minimise the disadvantages to any one
       category of road user at a given site. Alternatively, use of
       LED- powered internally-illuminated signs might be
       considered (see section 11). If signs are to be externally lit,
       the signs should be raised to take into account the risk of
       vandalism.
       >
       > 5.4.4. Regulatory signs must be placed as near as practicable
       to the start of a restriction and it is preferable to place them
       on the back line of the footway, or the verge where no footway
       is present. They should not be placed right on the corner of the
       junction, or right on the kerb side. Signs at a junction should
       be set back from the road, where practical, to aid driver’s
       visibility when turning in to that road. Setting a sign in this
       manner makes it aesthetically more attractive, less liable to
       damage, and more readily visible to road users who need to see
       it. It may also be sensible to angle signs at junctions slightly
       towards the side road carriageway so that they can be seen by
       turning traffic (particularly at night where signs are not
       directly lit and need to be illuminated by headlamps).
       >
       > 5.4.5. The fixing bands that attach the sign to the support
       should be tight enough and of an appropriate design to stop
       signs slipping or twisting around, or being deliberately rotated
       to give incorrect information to drivers. Designers should
       ensure adequate consideration is given to f ixings/support for
       sign plates as this is one of the main causes of failure.
       Manufacturers should supply suitable and appropriate fixings in
       accordance with their own declaration of performance to prevent
       panel separation, twist or slippage, including appropriate
       torque settings.
       >
       > So you can see the councils all so terrified of litigation if
       a pedestrian bangs his head on a sign mounted above a pavement,
       that they mount them beyond the tallest possible person !
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       should I present a video of driving normally and presenting a
       view of how it is impossible to read the signs when driving  on
       the road and turning into the junction as evidence ?
       #Post#: 86362--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Redbridge, 53j - restriction on vehicles entering a
       pedestrian zone, Sydney road, Perrymans farm road,
   DIR By: fraser.mitchell
       Date: August 19, 2025, 2:04 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       That would be a killer appeal, but it needs to be watertight.
       #Post#: 86380--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Redbridge, 53j - restriction on vehicles entering a
       pedestrian zone, Sydney road, Perrymans farm road,
   DIR By: flash2005
       Date: August 19, 2025, 3:04 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I am still not clear on which option is applicable here for the
       appeal here ? Is it no 4 ?  Penalty charge exceeded the amount
       applicable.
       •   The contravention alleged by the Authority on the PCN did
       not occur ☐
       •   I was not the owner of the vehicle at the material time
       ☐
       •   At the time of the alleged contravention the vehicle was
       in the control of someone without my consent ☐
       •   The penalty charge exceeded the amount applicable in the
       circumstances of the case ☐
       •   We are a hire firm and have supplied a valid hire
       agreement for a period of less than six months. ☐
       #Post#: 86382--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Redbridge, 53j - restriction on vehicles entering a
       pedestrian zone, Sydney road, Perrymans farm road,
   DIR By: flash2005
       Date: August 19, 2025, 3:10 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Incandescent link ---
       >
       > That would be a killer appeal, but it needs to be watertight.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Didn't understand the point about watertight ? What else can be
       added here ?
       #Post#: 86407--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Redbridge, 53j - restriction on vehicles entering a
       pedestrian zone, Sydney road, Perrymans farm road,
   DIR By: fraser.mitchell
       Date: August 19, 2025, 6:05 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: flash2005 link ---
       >
       > [quote author=Incandescent link=topic=7105.msg86362#msg86362
       date=1755630257]
       > That would be a killer appeal, but it needs to be watertight.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Didn't understand the point about watertight ? What else can be
       added here ?
       [/quote]
       The video needs to show that seeing the signs would require an
       unusual action by the driver, who is engaged in driving around
       urban streets with the need to be constantly on the alert for
       hazards. Should a driver look skywards when driving around such
       streets ? My answer is NO !!
       #Post#: 86660--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Redbridge, 53j - restriction on vehicles entering a
       pedestrian zone, Sydney road, Perrymans farm road,
   DIR By: flash2005
       Date: August 21, 2025, 10:01 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Incandescent link ---
       >
       > [quote author=flash2005 link=topic=7105.msg86382#msg86382
       date=1755634207]
       > [quote author=Incandescent link=topic=7105.msg86362#msg86362
       date=1755630257]
       > That would be a killer appeal, but it needs to be watertight.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Didn't understand the point about watertight ? What else can be
       added here ?
       [/quote]
       The video needs to show that seeing the signs would require an
       unusual action by the driver, who is engaged in driving around
       urban streets with the need to be constantly on the alert for
       hazards. Should a driver look skywards when driving around such
       streets ? My answer is NO !!
       [/quote]
       I have taken videos of both roads.  Is this watertight ?  The
       sign on the left side can't even be seen, and the one on the
       right side is too square of an angle to actually read.
       Sydney Road left turn
  HTML https://youtu.be/kHtxIoi3Hrg
       Perryman Road left turn
  HTML https://youtu.be/pknyGtLJPSw
       #Post#: 86697--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Redbridge, 53j - restriction on vehicles entering a
       pedestrian zone, Sydney road, Perrymans farm road,
   DIR By: fraser.mitchell
       Date: August 21, 2025, 1:29 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Not really, because it needs to be in Landscape mode. At the
       moment it is the kind of view a horse got when it was wearing
       blinkers.
       #Post#: 86731--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Redbridge, 53j - restriction on vehicles entering a
       pedestrian zone, Sydney road, Perrymans farm road,
   DIR By: Hippocrates
       Date: August 22, 2025, 4:18 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
  HTML https://www.ftla.uk/the-flame-pit/moving-traffic-pcns-missing-mandatory-information-the-london-local-authorities-a/msg86653/#msg86653
       #Post#: 86734--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Redbridge, 53j - restriction on vehicles entering a
       pedestrian zone, Sydney road, Perrymans farm road,
   DIR By: flash2005
       Date: August 22, 2025, 4:38 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Hippocrates link ---
       >
       >
  HTML https://www.ftla.uk/the-flame-pit/moving-traffic-pcns-missing-mandatory-information-the-london-local-authorities-a/msg86653/#msg86653
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       This is an excellent point, and I will add this to the appeal as
       extra ammunition.  I will also take another video in landscape
       mode today.  I still don't have clarity on which option to
       select as the reason for the appeal while submitting it as the
       procedural impropriety option is missing.
       *****************************************************
       Page 3 of 5
   DIR Previous Page
   DIR Next Page