DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 91700--------------------------------------------------
West Northamptonshire Bus Lane PCN - Order for Recovery
DIR By: m00nkeh
Date: September 27, 2025, 6:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
In July 2024 I was unfortunate enough to find myself in
Northampton after a very long day driving several hundred miles.
I ended up at a rather confusing junction with several road
closures trying to work out which way I could legally exit, and
noticed that one of the roads had a No Motor Vehicles sign with
the following text: "Except for buses, taxis, licensed private
hire and loading 6 pm - 10 am". I interpreted this to mean that
the No Motor Vehicles restriction was only in place between the
stated hours (the formatting of the sign meant that the times
were on their own line at the bottom), and as it was not yet
6pm, that I could legally drive on this street.
Google Streetview
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/B4VoqN9pPLbNXqcFA
After this I went on holiday (to somewhere considerably nicer
than Northampton), and on my return the attached PCN was
awaiting me. I assumed the whole thing was a mistake on the part
of the council and would easily be overturned - I am a law
abiding driver and on the rare occasion I have received a PCN I
have always successfully appealed, so I didn't think I would
need any help in this case and submitted the following appeal
online on August 8th:
--- Quote ---
> The signs at the junction between Drapery and Mercers Row
clearly state that the restriction only applies between 6pm and
10am. As the alleged contravention occurred at 17:19, this was
not within the hours that the restriction applies.
--- End Quote ---
On August 30th I received the 10 page(!) rejection attached
below, which I didn't feel really addressed the substance of my
appeal and instead explains that I should instead have taken a
diversion that goes the wrong way down a one way street. I was
really quite surprised that the appeal was rejected, as it had
seemed such a simple case of the council making a mistake, but I
now realised that the intended interpretation of the sign
differed from the way I had interpreted it. As I was not aware
of this when I made my original appeal, I contacted them again
with the following:
--- Quote ---
> I was very disappointed to receive your notice of rejection of
my appeal against PCN NP11367954. I intend to appeal to the
independent adjudicator, and I am confident that they will
decide in my favour, however I wanted to get in touch first in
the hope that you might be willing to do the reasonable thing
and cancel the PCN to avoid more hassle for everybody.
> The reason for my initial appeal was that I interpreted the
signage at the Southern end of Drapery to indicate that the No
Motor Vehicles restriction (with an exemption for buses, taxis,
licensed private hire and loading) is only in force between the
hours of 6pm and 10am. This is a perfectly reasonable
interpretation of the signage, and is compliant with the highway
code. I thought the PCN to be a simple error, and that as my car
was recorded entering Drapery at 5:19pm, it would be cancelled
as the restriction was not in effect for another 41 minutes.
> From your rejection letter, I now realise that the intended
meaning of the signage is that the exemption, rather than the
restriction, only applies during the stated hours. The problem
is that the signage is ambiguous, and its intended meaning is
not clear, even to someone highly familiar with the highway
code. I believe it may also be the case that the signage does
not conform to the highway code.
> In the Department for Transport Guidance on Regulatory Signs
(available at
HTML https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/know-your-traffic-signs/regulatory-signs),<br
/>in all examples given of signs that indicate a timed
prohibition, the stated times refer to when the prohibition is
in effect. The examples given are captioned as "Alternative
plates used with the ‘no vehicles’ sign, indicating times when
vehicles are prohibited, except for access." and "A time plate
used with a ‘no right turn’ or ‘no left turn’ sign indicates a
part-time prohibition."
> In the Department for Transport Guidance on Bus and Cycle
signs and Road Markings (available at
HTML https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/know-your-traffic-signs/bus-and-cycle-signs-and-road-markings),<br
/>an example is given of a timed bus lane, with the caption
"With-flow bus and pedal cycle lane sign showing hours of
operation. Where no times are shown, the bus lane operates at
all times." Again, this clearly indicates that when times are
stated on bus lane signage, the times refer to the hours during
which the bus lane is in effect.
> I have also included an image of a bus gate in my home town of
Durham, with signage indicating the hours for which the bus gate
is in effect. This example also uses standard blue bus lane
signage, with "Bus Gate" clearly marked on the road surface: two
things Drapery lacks that could help to reduce ambiguity. The
second image is of a No Motor Vehicles sign in London, with
times stated underneath referring to when the restriction is in
effect.
> I am confident that the ambiguity of the signage at Drapery -
specifically as to whether the hours stated on the sign refer to
the times when the restriction is in effect, as I interpreted,
or when the exemption applies, as it was presumably intended -
will lead the independent adjudicator to decide in my favour.
However, I wanted to first give you the opportunity to
reconsider your decision to avoid the unnecessary hassle of the
adjudication process.
--- End Quote ---
I wish this had been my first appeal, as their response
(attached below) basically said "you've had your one appeal,
anything else you send us will be met with a brick wall". I
registered an appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal on
September 27th, basically saying the same as above, and on
October 8th that appeal was rejected with the attached decision.
After this, I contacted West Northamptonshire Council a few more
times through the appeals website in the futile hope that I
might get through to a human being capable of exercising a bit
of common sense. I don't think there's any point in sharing all
this correspondence unless someone specifically wants to see it,
but I think it may be relevant that each time I sent a message,
I received the following reply:
--- Quote ---
> Dear XXX,
> This is an email from the West Northamptonshire Council's
Parking Services Team
> Thank you very much for your e-mail. This is now being
processed and the case has been placed ON HOLD (including the
discount payment amount) pending a decision which will be
emailed to you in due course.
> Penalty Charge Notice : NP11367954
> This message has been generated automatically. Please do not
reply.
--- End Quote ---
This email would seem to indicate that the case is on hold and
cannot proceed until a response is received. I received one such
email after sending a message on October 8th, however on
November 8th, despite having received no response, a Charge
Certificate (attached below) was issued. I'm sure they have no
obligation to put the case on hold for every piece of
correspondence they receive, but if their system sends an
automated message telling me that it is on hold when it isn't,
surely that's a pretty serious error on their part?
Finally this week, I received the attached Order of Recovery.
The last correspondence I received before this was the message
above stating the case was on hold on December 13th, so again it
seems the case has proceeded while they informed me it was on
hold.
I'm not going to pay it, as I don't believe petty bureaucrats
should have the power to bully normally law abiding motorists
for misinterpreting their overly complex signage. What can I do?
PCN
HTML https://1drv.ms/i/c/4ab082075d95c68c/EQEoqDROR0BBkluHtZ0OKlMBEiUkWSxmAieHI57Js_tgMQ?e=ZJPcaG
Rejection of Representations
HTML https://1drv.ms/b/c/4ab082075d95c68c/EQvZM_wMYYJLoD_PSRlpC9sBqFsyvCx-QHJ6r1F9k_f_AA?e=dScxm4
Response to email
HTML https://1drv.ms/b/c/4ab082075d95c68c/EVzr_U447N1FgOlrP3xwr7oBfDA-Vyn5CCMuZhtcgRT0hA?e=oX5BWH
Tribunal Decision
HTML https://1drv.ms/b/c/4ab082075d95c68c/ETchbHvtxoJNlMf45afuIn0BBFjTzVxXirbT5Zlim_6IZQ?e=iO34Nq
Charge Certificate
HTML https://1drv.ms/i/c/4ab082075d95c68c/EQAdl0d7fKZLgSoSQmMjv7MBofQ1tSzonn4WxSTZjnH05A?e=X1a8rS
Order of Recovery
HTML https://1drv.ms/i/c/4ab082075d95c68c/EWUvUWs8p1pOjFy4QmsvidMByQA2XjVzThwsCHYvP-6i4g?e=LZDjSp
#Post#: 91728--------------------------------------------------
Re: West Northamptonshire Bus Lane PCN - Order for Recovery
DIR By: Enceladus
Date: September 27, 2025, 9:10 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You've been to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and the Adjudicator
found against you, and further ordered you to pay the penalty
charge within 28 days. There's nothing you can do about that
now, no matter what the Council did or didn't say.
You didn't pay so the matter progressed through Charge
Certificate which increased the charge by 50%. And now to an
Order for Recovery which has added a further £10.
The TPT was the end of the road. I suggest you pay the OfR
immediately, certainly before the 9th October. If you don't pay
then the matter will escalate to the bailiffs which will add a
minimum of £75 to the bill. And a further £235 if they visit
your house.
#Post#: 91780--------------------------------------------------
Re: West Northamptonshire Bus Lane PCN - Order for Recovery
DIR By: Phantomcrusader
Date: September 27, 2025, 9:14 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
If you get another PCN like this at any time, I suggest arguing
that the PCN fails to state the contravention time as required
by regulations. It gives a detection time but the PCN says the
CCTV is unmanned. Therefore, the time it is detected could be
taken as the time/date a person views the contravention rather
than the time/date it actually occurred. There is no reason for
the Council to deviate from the required language. By doing so
they may cause unnecessary ambiguity.
#Post#: 91820--------------------------------------------------
Re: West Northamptonshire Bus Lane PCN - Order for Recovery
DIR By: m00nkeh
Date: September 28, 2025, 9:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the replies, is there really no other option at this
point? If I were to not pay, what would be the next steps and
likely timescale? It seems pretty messed up that I have no
further right to defend myself against this unless the council
made one of the very short list of very specific procedural
errors listed on the TE9 form. When I saw the words 'Witness
Statement' I assumed I would get the chance to make a statement
as one would in any court case. Informing me that the case is on
hold and then proceeding with it seems quite egregious, but as
it happened after the tribunal's (totally incorrect!) decision
it seems I can't do anything about it. I am learning now that
this whole process, and the real value of this forum, is that
every step seems more concerned with whether the council have
followed correct procedure, rather than whether I actually did
anything wrong in the first place!
#Post#: 91860--------------------------------------------------
Re: West Northamptonshire Bus Lane PCN - Order for Recovery
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: September 28, 2025, 12:44 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The next steps are (1) you request a judicial review of the
adjudication decision. This will cost you real money, or (2) pay
up before bailiffs are instructed to collect the debt. If they
are instructed, they will send you a letter. This adds £75 to
the debt, then if the debt remains unpaid, they can visit your
premises and add a visit fee of £235.
You need to accept that you lost the adjudication, frankly.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1