DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 84849--------------------------------------------------
Re: London Borough of Bexley, entering bus/cycle only route,
Townley Road roundabout, Bexley.
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: August 8, 2025, 4:20 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I'll do a draft tomorrow.
#Post#: 84953--------------------------------------------------
Re: London Borough of Bexley, entering bus/cycle only route,
Townley Road roundabout, Bexley.
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: August 10, 2025, 4:13 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Still thinking on it. Probably later this evening.
PCN wording. Bus Lane legend. Left hand sign. Circumstances
making it impossible to reverse out.
#Post#: 85243--------------------------------------------------
Re: London Borough of Bexley, entering bus/cycle only route,
Townley Road roundabout, Bexley.
DIR By: abipa
Date: August 11, 2025, 5:49 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Hippocrates link ---
>
> Still thinking on it. Probably later this evening.
>
> PCN wording. Bus Lane legend. Left hand sign. Circumstances
making it impossible to reverse out.
>
--- End Quote ---
I am writing to formally challenge the above Penalty Charge
Notice, issued for an alleged moving traffic contravention at
the Townley Road bus gate at 00:28 hours on [date].
I respectfully submit that the PCN should be cancelled on the
grounds that the contravention did not occur, for the following
reasons:
⸻
1. Inadequate and Poorly Maintained Road Markings (TSRGD
Compliance)
•
extremely faded and barely visible, particularly in low-light
conditions.
•
(Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996, the council
has a duty to ensure that traffic signs and road markings are
maintained so that they are clearly visible at all times.
•
road markings and signs be both lawful and sufficiently
conspicuous to give road users adequate warning.
•
state of the markings made it impossible to clearly recognise
the restriction before committing to the turn.
⸻
2. Lack of Adequate Advance Warning Signs
•
that the exit ahead was restricted to buses only.
•
gates so that drivers can take an alternative route without
making unsafe manoeuvres at the point of entry.
•
I had already begun turning, making avoidance impossible without
hazard.
⸻
3. Immediate Attempt to Comply Once Restriction Noticed
•
attempted to reverse out to avoid entering the restricted
section.
•
Unfortunately, a bus entered the lane at that moment, preventing
me from safely reversing without endangering myself or other
road users.
•
contravention and my willingness to comply once the restriction
became apparent.
⸻
4. Time, Circumstances, and Lack of Gain
•
minimal and there is no benefit or advantage to me in entering
the bus gate.
•
traffic or gain priority — I was simply unaware of the
restriction due to the inadequate signage and faded markings.
⸻
5. Supporting Precedent and Public Interest
•
where bus gate or bus lane signage/markings were not
sufficiently visible or maintained, especially where drivers
took immediate action to comply once aware.
•
not penalising drivers caught out by unclear or poorly
maintained restrictions, particularly in low-light conditions.
⸻
Conclusion
Given the inadequate road markings, lack of advance warning,
reduced visibility at night, and my immediate attempt to avoid
the restriction upon realisation, I respectfully request that
the PCN be cancelled.
I look forward to your confirmation that this PCN has been
withdrawn.
Is this okay?
#Post#: 85246--------------------------------------------------
Re: London Borough of Bexley, entering bus/cycle only route,
Townley Road roundabout, Bexley.
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: August 11, 2025, 6:56 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
It reads well, but don't be surprised if they reject your reps
and refuse to cancel the PCN. London councils, and also councils
of large cities elsewere in England, are notorious for refusing
all representations no matter how valid. This is because they
know from experience that if they do this, most people just
cough-up, being unwilling to risk the full PCN penalty at the
adjudicators. So if you want an unbiased assessment of your
case, you have to take them to London Tribunals
#Post#: 85261--------------------------------------------------
Re: London Borough of Bexley, entering bus/cycle only route,
Townley Road roundabout, Bexley.
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: August 12, 2025, 3:07 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: abipa link ---
>
> [quote author=Hippocrates link=topic=7582.msg84953#msg84953
date=1754817232]
> Still thinking on it. Probably later this evening.
>
> PCN wording. Bus Lane legend. Left hand sign. Circumstances
making it impossible to reverse out.
>
--- End Quote ---
I am writing to formally challenge the above Penalty Charge
Notice, issued for an alleged moving traffic contravention at
the Townley Road bus gate at 00:28 hours on [date].
I respectfully submit that the PCN should be cancelled on the
grounds that the contravention did not occur, for the following
reasons:
⸻
1. Inadequate and Poorly Maintained Road Markings (TSRGD
Compliance)
• The road legend “BUS LANE”/“BUS ONLY” at the location is
extremely faded and barely visible, particularly in low-light
conditions. Which is it? If Bus Lane, say it is not in the
regulations for it to be placed with a 953 sign.
• Under Regulation 18 of the Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders
(Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996, the council
has a duty to ensure that traffic signs and road markings are
maintained so that they are clearly visible at all times.
• TSRGD 2016 and Department for Transport guidance require that
road markings and signs be both lawful and sufficiently
conspicuous to give road users adequate warning.
• At 00:28 hours, visibility is naturally reduced; the poor
state of the markings made it impossible to clearly recognise
the restriction before committing to the turn.
⸻
2. Lack of Adequate Advance Warning Signs
• There was no clear advance warning on my approach to indicate
that the exit ahead was restricted to buses only.
• TSRGD and DfT guidance recommend advance signage for bus
gates so that drivers can take an alternative route without
making unsafe manoeuvres at the point of entry.
• The first visible sign to me was on the left-hand side after
I had already begun turning, making avoidance impossible without
hazard.
⸻
3. Immediate Attempt to Comply Once Restriction Noticed
• Upon realising the lane gate was for buses only, I
immediately attempted to reverse out to avoid entering the
restricted section.
• The council’s own video evidence shows my attempt to do so.
Unfortunately, a bus entered the lane at that moment, preventing
me from safely reversing without endangering myself or other
road users.
• This demonstrates my lack of intent to commit the
contravention and my willingness to comply once the restriction
became apparent.
⸻
4. Time, Circumstances, and Lack of Gain
• This incident occurred at 00:28 hours, when bus traffic is
minimal and there is no benefit or advantage to me in entering
the bus gate.
• My actions were not motivated by any attempt to bypass
traffic or gain priority — I was simply unaware of the
restriction due to the inadequate signage and faded markings.
⸻
5. Supporting Precedent and Public Interest
• The London Tribunals have previously allowed appeals in cases
where bus gate or bus lane signage/markings were not
sufficiently visible or maintained, especially where drivers
took immediate action to comply once aware.
• Enforcement should be aimed at preventing deliberate misuse,
not penalising drivers caught out by unclear or poorly
maintained restrictions, particularly in low-light conditions.
⸻
Conclusion
Given the inadequate road markings, lack of advance warning,
reduced visibility at night, and my immediate attempt to avoid
the restriction upon realisation, I respectfully request that
the PCN be cancelled.
I look forward to your confirmation that this PCN has been
withdrawn.
Is this okay?
[/quote]
I have amended accordingly. Also, I would add this at the end:
I make this collateral challenge regarding the wording of the
sentence immediately above the box re payment. Since the PCN
omits mandatory information that the PCN must be paid by 28 days
beginning with the date of the notice, the said statement
therefore conflates the two distinct time periods and renders
the PCN unclear and invalid. In light of all the above, please
cancel.
#Post#: 85434--------------------------------------------------
Re: London Borough of Bexley, entering bus/cycle only route,
Townley Road roundabout, Bexley.
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: August 12, 2025, 3:09 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Hippocrates link ---
>
> [quote author=abipa link=topic=7582.msg85243#msg85243
date=1754952551]
> [quote author=Hippocrates link=topic=7582.msg84953#msg84953
date=1754817232]
> Still thinking on it. Probably later this evening.
>
> PCN wording. Bus Lane legend. Left hand sign. Circumstances
making it impossible to reverse out.
>
--- End Quote ---
I am writing to formally challenge the above Penalty Charge
Notice, issued for an alleged moving traffic contravention at
the Townley Road bus gate at 00:28 hours on [date].
I respectfully submit that the PCN should be cancelled on the
grounds that the contravention did not occur, for the following
reasons:
⸻
1. Inadequate and Poorly Maintained Road Markings (TSRGD
Compliance)
• The road legend “BUS LANE”/“BUS ONLY” at the location is
extremely faded and barely visible, particularly in low-light
conditions. Which is it? If Bus Lane, say it is not in the
regulations for it to be placed with a 953 sign.
• Under Regulation 18 of the Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders
(Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996, the council
has a duty to ensure that traffic signs and road markings are
maintained so that they are clearly visible at all times.
• TSRGD 2016 and Department for Transport guidance require that
road markings and signs be both lawful and sufficiently
conspicuous to give road users adequate warning.
• At 00:28 hours, visibility is naturally reduced; the poor
state of the markings made it impossible to clearly recognise
the restriction before committing to the turn.
⸻
2. Lack of Adequate Advance Warning Signs
• There was no clear advance warning on my approach to indicate
that the exit ahead was restricted to buses only.
• TSRGD and DfT guidance recommend advance signage for bus
gates so that drivers can take an alternative route without
making unsafe manoeuvres at the point of entry.
• The first visible sign to me was on the left-hand side after
I had already begun turning, making avoidance impossible without
hazard.
⸻
3. Immediate Attempt to Comply Once Restriction Noticed
• Upon realising the lane gate was for buses only, I
immediately attempted to reverse out to avoid entering the
restricted section.
• The council’s own video evidence shows my attempt to do so.
Unfortunately, a bus entered the lane gate at that moment,
preventing me from safely reversing without endangering myself
or other road users.
• This demonstrates my lack of intent to commit the
contravention and my willingness to comply once the restriction
became apparent.
⸻
4. Time, Circumstances, and Lack of Gain
• This incident occurred at 00:28 hours, when bus traffic is
minimal and there is no benefit or advantage to me in entering
the bus gate.
• My actions were not motivated by any attempt to bypass
traffic or gain priority — I was simply unaware of the
restriction due to the inadequate signage and faded markings.
⸻
5. Supporting Precedent and Public Interest
• The London Tribunals have previously allowed appeals in cases
where bus gate or bus lane signage/markings were not
sufficiently visible or maintained, especially where drivers
took immediate action to comply once aware.
• Enforcement should be aimed at preventing deliberate misuse,
not penalising drivers caught out by unclear or poorly
maintained restrictions, particularly in low-light conditions.
⸻
Conclusion
Given the inadequate road markings, lack of advance warning,
reduced visibility at night, and my immediate attempt to avoid
the restriction upon realisation, I respectfully request that
the PCN be cancelled.
I look forward to your confirmation that this PCN has been
withdrawn.
Is this okay?
[/quote]
I have amended accordingly. Also, I would add this at the end:
I make this collateral challenge regarding the wording of the
sentence immediately above the box re payment. Since the PCN
omits mandatory information that the PCN must be paid by 28 days
beginning with the date of the notice, the said statement
therefore conflates the two distinct time periods and renders
the PCN unclear and invalid. In light of all the above, please
cancel.
[/quote]
#Post#: 85449--------------------------------------------------
Re: London Borough of Bexley, entering bus/cycle only route,
Townley Road roundabout, Bexley.
DIR By: abipa
Date: August 12, 2025, 10:33 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Hippocrates link ---
>
> [quote author=abipa link=topic=7582.msg85243#msg85243
date=1754952551]
> [quote author=Hippocrates link=topic=7582.msg84953#msg84953
date=1754817232]
> Still thinking on it. Probably later this evening.
>
> PCN wording. Bus Lane legend. Left hand sign. Circumstances
making it impossible to reverse out.
>
--- End Quote ---
I am writing to formally challenge the above Penalty Charge
Notice, issued for an alleged moving traffic contravention at
the Townley Road bus gate at 00:28 hours on [date].
I respectfully submit that the PCN should be cancelled on the
grounds that the contravention did not occur, for the following
reasons:
⸻
1. Inadequate and Poorly Maintained Road Markings (TSRGD
Compliance)
• The road legend “BUS LANE”/“BUS ONLY” at the location is
extremely faded and barely visible, particularly in low-light
conditions. Which is it? If Bus Lane, say it is not in the
regulations for it to be placed with a 953 sign.
• Under Regulation 18 of the Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders
(Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996, the council
has a duty to ensure that traffic signs and road markings are
maintained so that they are clearly visible at all times.
• TSRGD 2016 and Department for Transport guidance require that
road markings and signs be both lawful and sufficiently
conspicuous to give road users adequate warning.
• At 00:28 hours, visibility is naturally reduced; the poor
state of the markings made it impossible to clearly recognise
the restriction before committing to the turn.
⸻
2. Lack of Adequate Advance Warning Signs
• There was no clear advance warning on my approach to indicate
that the exit ahead was restricted to buses only.
• TSRGD and DfT guidance recommend advance signage for bus
gates so that drivers can take an alternative route without
making unsafe manoeuvres at the point of entry.
• The first visible sign to me was on the left-hand side after
I had already begun turning, making avoidance impossible without
hazard.
⸻
3. Immediate Attempt to Comply Once Restriction Noticed
• Upon realising the lane gate was for buses only, I
immediately attempted to reverse out to avoid entering the
restricted section.
• The council’s own video evidence shows my attempt to do so.
Unfortunately, a bus entered the lane at that moment, preventing
me from safely reversing without endangering myself or other
road users.
• This demonstrates my lack of intent to commit the
contravention and my willingness to comply once the restriction
became apparent.
⸻
4. Time, Circumstances, and Lack of Gain
• This incident occurred at 00:28 hours, when bus traffic is
minimal and there is no benefit or advantage to me in entering
the bus gate.
• My actions were not motivated by any attempt to bypass
traffic or gain priority — I was simply unaware of the
restriction due to the inadequate signage and faded markings.
⸻
5. Supporting Precedent and Public Interest
• The London Tribunals have previously allowed appeals in cases
where bus gate or bus lane signage/markings were not
sufficiently visible or maintained, especially where drivers
took immediate action to comply once aware.
• Enforcement should be aimed at preventing deliberate misuse,
not penalising drivers caught out by unclear or poorly
maintained restrictions, particularly in low-light conditions.
⸻
Conclusion
Given the inadequate road markings, lack of advance warning,
reduced visibility at night, and my immediate attempt to avoid
the restriction upon realisation, I respectfully request that
the PCN be cancelled.
I look forward to your confirmation that this PCN has been
withdrawn.
Is this okay?
[/quote]
I have amended accordingly. Also, I would add this at the end:
I make this collateral challenge regarding the wording of the
sentence immediately above the box re payment. Since the PCN
omits mandatory information that the PCN must be paid by 28 days
beginning with the date of the notice, the said statement
therefore conflates the two distinct time periods and renders
the PCN unclear and invalid. In light of all the above, please
cancel.
[/quote]
Thank you so much for your elaborate reply. I have a few
questions, I would be very grateful for your response to them. I
will post my questions in the next reply.
#Post#: 85450--------------------------------------------------
Re: London Borough of Bexley, entering bus/cycle only route,
Townley Road roundabout, Bexley.
DIR By: abipa
Date: August 12, 2025, 10:38 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
1. Inadequate and Poorly Maintained Road Markings (TSRGD
Compliance)
• The road legend “BUS LANE”/“BUS ONLY” at the location is
extremely faded and barely visible, particularly in low-light
conditions. Which is it? If Bus Lane, say it is not in the
regulations for it to be placed with a 953 sign.
• Under Regulation 18 of the Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders
(Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996, the council
has a duty to ensure that traffic signs and road markings are
maintained so that they are clearly visible at all times.
• TSRGD 2016 and Department for Transport guidance require that
road markings and signs be both lawful and sufficiently
conspicuous to give road users adequate warning.
• At 00:28 hours, visibility is naturally reduced; the poor
state of the markings made it impossible to clearly recognise
the restriction before committing to the turn.
I was reading regarding the Bus lane legend and the 953 sign, I
see that both of them need to be placed as per regulations.
How do you suggest that I add this particular point?
#Post#: 85711--------------------------------------------------
Re: London Borough of Bexley, entering bus/cycle only route,
Townley Road roundabout, Bexley.
DIR By: abipa
Date: August 14, 2025, 3:33 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: abipa link ---
>
> [quote author=Hippocrates link=topic=7582.msg85261#msg85261
date=1754986021]
> [quote author=abipa link=topic=7582.msg85243#msg85243
date=1754952551]
> [quote author=Hippocrates link=topic=7582.msg84953#msg84953
date=1754817232]
> Still thinking on it. Probably later this evening.
>
> PCN wording. Bus Lane legend. Left hand sign. Circumstances
making it impossible to reverse out.
>
--- End Quote ---
I am writing to formally challenge the above Penalty Charge
Notice, issued for an alleged moving traffic contravention at
the Townley Road bus gate at 00:28 hours on [date].
I respectfully submit that the PCN should be cancelled on the
grounds that the contravention did not occur, for the following
reasons:
⸻
1. Inadequate and Poorly Maintained Road Markings (TSRGD
Compliance)
• The road legend “BUS LANE”/“BUS ONLY” at the location is
extremely faded and barely visible, particularly in low-light
conditions. Which is it? If Bus Lane, say it is not in the
regulations for it to be placed with a 953 sign.
• Under Regulation 18 of the Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders
(Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996, the council
has a duty to ensure that traffic signs and road markings are
maintained so that they are clearly visible at all times.
• TSRGD 2016 and Department for Transport guidance require that
road markings and signs be both lawful and sufficiently
conspicuous to give road users adequate warning.
• At 00:28 hours, visibility is naturally reduced; the poor
state of the markings made it impossible to clearly recognise
the restriction before committing to the turn.
⸻
2. Lack of Adequate Advance Warning Signs
• There was no clear advance warning on my approach to indicate
that the exit ahead was restricted to buses only.
• TSRGD and DfT guidance recommend advance signage for bus
gates so that drivers can take an alternative route without
making unsafe manoeuvres at the point of entry.
• The first visible sign to me was on the left-hand side after
I had already begun turning, making avoidance impossible without
hazard.
⸻
3. Immediate Attempt to Comply Once Restriction Noticed
• Upon realising the lane gate was for buses only, I
immediately attempted to reverse out to avoid entering the
restricted section.
• The council’s own video evidence shows my attempt to do so.
Unfortunately, a bus entered the lane at that moment, preventing
me from safely reversing without endangering myself or other
road users.
• This demonstrates my lack of intent to commit the
contravention and my willingness to comply once the restriction
became apparent.
⸻
4. Time, Circumstances, and Lack of Gain
• This incident occurred at 00:28 hours, when bus traffic is
minimal and there is no benefit or advantage to me in entering
the bus gate.
• My actions were not motivated by any attempt to bypass
traffic or gain priority — I was simply unaware of the
restriction due to the inadequate signage and faded markings.
⸻
5. Supporting Precedent and Public Interest
• The London Tribunals have previously allowed appeals in cases
where bus gate or bus lane signage/markings were not
sufficiently visible or maintained, especially where drivers
took immediate action to comply once aware.
• Enforcement should be aimed at preventing deliberate misuse,
not penalising drivers caught out by unclear or poorly
maintained restrictions, particularly in low-light conditions.
⸻
Conclusion
Given the inadequate road markings, lack of advance warning,
reduced visibility at night, and my immediate attempt to avoid
the restriction upon realisation, I respectfully request that
the PCN be cancelled.
I look forward to your confirmation that this PCN has been
withdrawn.
Is this okay?
[/quote]
I have amended accordingly. Also, I would add this at the end:
I make this collateral challenge regarding the wording of the
sentence immediately above the box re payment. Since the PCN
omits mandatory information that the PCN must be paid by 28 days
beginning with the date of the notice, the said statement
therefore conflates the two distinct time periods and renders
the PCN unclear and invalid. In light of all the above, please
cancel.
[/quote]
Thank you so much for your elaborate reply. I have a few
questions, I would be very grateful for your response to them. I
will post my questions in the next reply.
[/quote]
Could you please help me with the first point? I did not
understand what to erite.
#Post#: 85745--------------------------------------------------
Re: London Borough of Bexley, entering bus/cycle only route,
Townley Road roundabout, Bexley.
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: August 15, 2025, 3:29 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Sorry as was busy all day yesterday. Good luck.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 4
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page