DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 124844--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bus lane PCN Southwark Council
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: July 15, 2026, 2:58 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
5th August at 15.00 hrs there is a hearing if anyone wishes to
observe.
#Post#: 124847--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bus lane PCN Southwark Council
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: July 15, 2026, 3:05 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: ILoveCats123 link ---
>
>
> You can formally challenge your PCN by using an Enforcement
Notice form. The vehicle's owner will automatically
> receive the form if the PCN has not been paid within 28 days
of the date shown on it. The form offers you the
> chance to formally challenge your PCN or pay the full £160.00.
If you decide to formally challenge your PCN,
> please do not write to us again but wait until the Enforcement
Notice form arrives.
>
>
--- End Quote ---
This is not what the law states at Part II para. 4 (e):
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/1996/9/section/4/enacted
(e)that, if the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the
28 day period, an enforcement notice may be served by the
council on the person appearing to them to be the owner of the
vehicle;
******
HTML https://www.standard.co.uk/hp/front/bus-lane-driver-exposes-flaw-in-penalty-notices-6487620.html
BTW, it was his son driving not him! Mr Burke subsequently
supported this in a later decision in which I assisted.
ETA Register of Appeals
Register kept under Regulation 20 of the Road Traffic (Parking
Adjudicators) (London) Regulations 1993, as amended and
Regulation 17 of the Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic
Contraventions (Representations and Appeals) (England)
Regulations 2022.
Case Details
Case reference 2100649871
Appellant Grace Elizabeth Wheatland
Authority Royal Borough of Kingston Upon Thames
VRM X653XFX
PCN Details
PCN KT55276825
Contravention date 20 May 2010
Contravention time 08:49:00
Contravention location Eden Street
Penalty amount GBP 120.00
Contravention Being in a bus lane
Referral date -
Decision Date 12 May 2011
Adjudicator Michael Burke
Appeal decision Appeal allowed
Direction cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and the Enforcement
Notice.
Reasons The allegation in this case is that the vehicle was in
the bus lane during the hours of operation. Miss Wheatland does
not dispute this but criticises the quality of the bus lane
signage. I have considered very carefully the criticisms she
makes but having considered her evidence together with Google
Street View I am satisfied that the bus lane signage was clear
and adequate and that any respect in which it failed to comply
with Traffic Signs, Regulations and General Directions 2002 or
Traffic Signs Manual 2008 would come within the de minimis rule
as too trifling to be regarded.
In the circumstances Miss Wheatland could have had no complaint
had she been required to pay a penalty charge. However, I have
also had to consider part of the wording on the face of the PCN.
Miss Wheatland asserts that the PCN is non-compliant in stating
that in the event of failure to make representations or a
payment 'an Enforcement Notice will be served' rather than 'may
be served'. He refers to a PCN cancelled by this Local Authority
on similar grounds.
It is an enduring mystery why Local Authorities seem unable
simply to copy out the words of the statute or statutory
instrument imposing formal requirements. It is not sufficient
for the Local Authority to say as here that they have
subsequently amended the wording. They have given no good reason
for departing from the statutory wording in the first place.
However, the fact that the Enforcement Authority depart from the
formal wording of a statute or statutory instrument does not
necessarily invalidate the document. The question I have to
consider is whether the PCN was substantially compliant.
I regard this as a borderline case. Having considered the matter
very carefully I do not feel able to say that the wording on the
PCN is substantially compliant and accordingly I allow the
appeal.
#Post#: 125413--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bus lane PCN Southwark Council
DIR By: ILoveCats123
Date: July 22, 2026, 12:00 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I am here to submit reps whenever you are ready
#Post#: 125431--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bus lane PCN Southwark Council
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: July 22, 2026, 4:55 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: ILoveCats123 link ---
>
> I am here to submit reps whenever you are ready
>
--- End Quote ---
Yes sir. I will PM you.
#Post#: 127730--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bus lane PCN Southwark Council
DIR By: ILoveCats123
Date: August 13, 2026, 10:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=12]Incandescent[/member]
Hippocrates suggest that the time frame in which the EN was sent
bares no relevance. Although the legislation doesn’t specify a
limit in which an EN must be sent, you said that anything more
than 3 months is considered abuse of process by LT.
Do we have any example cases?
I can have a look but really need to submit reps against the EN
today as running out of time.
#Post#: 127735--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bus lane PCN Southwark Council
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: August 13, 2026, 12:25 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: ILoveCats123 link ---
>
> [member=12]Incandescent[/member]
>
> Hippocrates suggest that the time frame in which the EN was
sent bares no relevance. Although the legislation doesn’t
specify a limit in which an EN must be sent, you said that
anything more than 3 months is considered abuse of process by
LT.
>
> Do we have any example cases?
>
> I can have a look but really need to submit reps against the
EN today as running out of time.
>
--- End Quote ---
You cannot complain about something which is irrelevant and does
not exist.
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/1996/9/schedule/1/enacted
The law is clear: THERE IS NO TIME LIMIT TO SERVE AN ENFORCEMENT
NOTICE. if you want to spend time chasing a red herring, then
please crack on as I do not have the time.
#Post#: 127742--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bus lane PCN Southwark Council
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: August 13, 2026, 1:04 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The CHief Adjudicator has made it clear to councils that delays
of over 3 months to do anything in the enforcement process is
grounds for cancellation, unless very good reasons are
submitted.
#Post#: 127743--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bus lane PCN Southwark Council
DIR By: ILoveCats123
Date: August 13, 2026, 1:36 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Even if, for argument’s sake, (wink) it isn’t relevant, then
it’s not like the council can disregard our other arguments
anyway. So I don’t see a harm.
I think we should include in the reps
#Post#: 127755--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bus lane PCN Southwark Council
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: August 13, 2026, 3:43 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Well, if you do not wish to follow my advice, then count me out.
The issue is a red herring. We are not talking about
unconscionable delays re NORs. This is a completely different
matter.
I will not put my name as a representative to a case in which I
would be embarrassed.
#Post#: 127758--------------------------------------------------
Re: Bus lane PCN Southwark Council
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: August 13, 2026, 4:01 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Incandescent link ---
>
> The CHief Adjudicator has made it clear to councils that
delays of over 3 months to do anything in the enforcement
process is grounds for cancellation, unless very good reasons
are submitted.
>
--- End Quote ---
Where please?
*****************************************************
Page 5 of 6
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page