DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 101177--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge - 53J - term time only sign
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: December 5, 2025, 11:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Got the date. Do you want representation?
#Post#: 101179--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge - 53J - term time only sign
DIR By: bigred247
Date: December 5, 2025, 11:38 am
---------------------------------------------------------
7th January 2026 at 14:00
#Post#: 101182--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge - 53J - term time only sign
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: December 5, 2025, 11:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Yes just read it. They have removed all the plates now which is
a strong point.
#Post#: 101199--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge - 53J - term time only sign
DIR By: NTIAEP
Date: December 5, 2025, 12:30 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Hippocrates link ---
>
> Yes just read it. They have removed all the plates now which
is a strong point.
>
--- End Quote ---
Not round the corner from me they haven't. And on some of
these signs, the blue matching tape/film which was used to cover
up "term-time only" has mysteriously disappeared, exposing and
displaying the phrase once again.
I've just skimmed the Evidence Pack and (unless I've missed it),
whilst LBR rely upon and refer to it explicitly in the 1st
paragraph on pg6, the TMO itself makes no reference to the term
"Term-Time only" or its related sign. Why the sign then? As it
only leads to confusion as term-time is not 24/7, 365 days of
the year, which the TMO implies.
The TMO also makes numerous reference to Column 5 of the
Schedule.....which doesn't exist??
#Post#: 101209--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge - 53J - term time only sign
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: December 5, 2025, 2:05 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I've just skimmed the Evidence Pack
Has this been posted?
#Post#: 101222--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge - 53J - term time only sign
DIR By: John U.K.
Date: December 6, 2025, 2:13 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: H C Andersen link ---
>
> I've just skimmed the Evidence Pack
>
> Has this been posted?
>
--- End Quote ---
Post #29
#Post#: 101235--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge - 53J - term time only sign
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: December 6, 2025, 5:38 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks.
OP, I cannot find the following in the evidence:
Support for the statements in para.1 of page 3 of the Council's
Summary e.g. DfT guidance etc.
The part of the TMO which refers to 'traffic signs'.
For others, I cannot find the cited ETA decisions in para. 2,
have they been referenced correctly?
For what it's worth, as regards the contravention IMO the issues
for the adjudicator are:
1.What does the Traffic Management Order provide;
2.Is this conveyed adequately by traffic signs to meet the legal
test i.e. as a minimum LATOR?
1. An all-year round restriction as set out in col. 4 of item 1
of the Schedule to the TMO. There is NO legal authority for
'term-time' only within the order.
2. The signs comprise an unspecified advance warning sign and at
the entrance to the restricted area a prescribed traffic sign
together with 'colourful on-street information signs that are
designed to catch the eye of ... drivers.'
The 'colourful signs' are therefore considered by the council to
form part of the regulatory signage at this point. However, the
signs in combination do not convey the legal position which is,
according to the TMO, a 365-day restriction.
Self-evidently, the council has failed to meet the LATOR test.
The council appears to want matters both ways: to have a TMO
which is made by a formal process of corporate council
decision-making and consultation which is then varied at a whim
by departmental officers who ignore its provisions by failing to
enforce as required.
If 'procedural impropriety' was a ground of appeal, I'd include
it.
#Post#: 101247--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge - 53J - term time only sign
DIR By: bigred247
Date: December 6, 2025, 7:10 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: H C Andersen link ---
>
> Thanks.
>
> OP, I cannot find the following in the evidence:
>
> Support for the statements in para.1 of page 3 of the
Council's Summary e.g. DfT guidance etc.
>
> The part of the TMO which refers to 'traffic signs'.
>
> For others, I cannot find the cited ETA decisions in para. 2,
have they been referenced correctly?
>
> For what it's worth, as regards the contravention IMO the
issues for the adjudicator are:
>
> 1.What does the Traffic Management Order provide;
> 2.Is this conveyed adequately by traffic signs to meet the
legal test i.e. as a minimum LATOR?
>
> 1. An all-year round restriction as set out in col. 4 of item
1 of the Schedule to the TMO. There is NO legal authority for
'term-time' only within the order.
>
> 2. The signs comprise an unspecified advance warning sign and
at the entrance to the restricted area a prescribed traffic sign
together with 'colourful on-street information signs that are
designed to catch the eye of ... drivers.'
>
> The 'colourful signs' are therefore considered by the council
to form part of the regulatory signage at this point. However,
the signs in combination do not convey the legal position which
is, according to the TMO, a 365-day restriction.
> Self-evidently, the council has failed to meet the LATOR test.
>
> The council appears to want matters both ways: to have a TMO
which is made by a formal process of corporate council
decision-making and consultation which is then varied at a whim
by departmental officers who ignore its provisions by failing to
enforce as required.
>
> If 'procedural impropriety' was a ground of appeal, I'd
include it.
>
--- End Quote ---
[member=428]H C Andersen[/member]
I've just gone through the evidence pack (hard copy) again, and
there are only 13 pages (26 sides) - are you saying some of the
evidence is missing?
#Post#: 101248--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge - 53J - term time only sign
DIR By: bigred247
Date: December 6, 2025, 7:11 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Hippocrates link ---
>
> Got the date. Do you want representation?
>
--- End Quote ---
[member=24]Hippocrates[/member]
Yes please :)
#Post#: 101251--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge - 53J - term time only sign
DIR By: bigred247
Date: December 6, 2025, 7:13 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: NTIAEP link ---
>
> [quote author=Hippocrates link=topic=7439.msg101182#msg101182
date=1764956534]
> Yes just read it. They have removed all the plates now which
is a strong point.
>
--- End Quote ---
Not round the corner from me they haven't. And on some of
these signs, the blue matching tape/film which was used to cover
up "term-time only" has mysteriously disappeared, exposing and
displaying the phrase once again.
I've just skimmed the Evidence Pack and (unless I've missed it),
whilst LBR rely upon and refer to it explicitly in the 1st
paragraph on pg6, the TMO itself makes no reference to the term
"Term-Time only" or its related sign. Why the sign then? As it
only leads to confusion as term-time is not 24/7, 365 days of
the year, which the TMO implies.
The TMO also makes numerous reference to Column 5 of the
Schedule.....which doesn't exist??
[/quote]
Is this more missing evidence? What is the best approach in
getting hold of any missing/referenced evidence?
*****************************************************
Page 4 of 6
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page