notomob.co.uk

General Category => General No To Mob Discussion => Topic started by: The Bald Eagle on 06 December, 2012, 02:59:44 PM

Title: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: The Bald Eagle on 06 December, 2012, 02:59:44 PM
Now we can do the "We told you so" dance.  :dancing: :P :dancing: :P :P :dancing: :P :P :P :dancing: :P :P :P :P

----------------------------------------------------------

Case Number MW 06559G

Adjudicator’s Decision

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and Medway Council

Penalty Charge Notice MW99718678 £60.00

Appeal allowed on the ground that the alleged contravention did not occur.

I direct the Council to cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and Notice to Owner.           

Reasons

The PCN is dated 29 June 2012 and was issued by post in respect of a contravention on 25 June 2012 at 12:44 relating to vehicle GU10FFZ in Globe Lane for being in a bus lane. This was a personal appeal hearing at Chatham on 26 October 2012 attended by the appellant and her husband. A representative from the council attended but
only to observe and not to participate.

At the conclusion of the hearing I adjourned in order further to consider the evidence and so that I could visit this location myself which I did on 23 November 2012. I also directed that the council inform the Tribunal of the number of PCNs issued in respect of this bus lane. In response to my direction, the council has informed the Tribunal that a total of 13,714 PCNs have been issued since 6 November 2011.

Mrs New appeals on the basis that the signage for this bus lane is unclear. The road layout had changed since her last visit to Chatham. She explained that she had been to Staples in Medway Street and drove out of the car park, turning left with the intention of going to Dock Road. Whilst she remembers passing buses, she could not recall any signage indicating a restriction.

Mrs New explained in detail the route she had taken and also gave me her observations on the inadequacy of the signage following a subsequent visit. In particular she raised the question of where a vehicle was to go from Medway
Street when there were bus lanes on the left and the right and the road straight was not accessible by cars.

The video of the alleged contravention shows Mrs New’s vehicle slowly approaching a pedestrian crossing which is immediately follows the two bus lane signs which indicate the start of the bus lane. When I showed this to Mrs New at the hearing and asked where her attention was focused as she drove in this direction, she said that it was on the pedestrians and the crossing.

The council argues that the signage is clear. There are signs on Medway Street indicating the presence of bus lanes on both the right and left which can be seen prior to turning. There are two signs on either side of the start of the bus lane. A vehicle approaching this junction is permitted to continue straight ahead to enter Military Road and gain access to Chatham High Street. The area between the two bus lanes is not classed as a bus lane and enables the driver to turn around and return to Medway Street.

Having reviewed the evidence provided by the parties and visited the location, I find as follows:
1. There is signage on Medway Street indicating bus lanes on the left and right turns.
2. There is a 20 MPH speed limit sign just before the junction of Medway Street and the crossroads.
3. There is a pedestrian crossing at the junction of Medway Street and the crossroads.
4. Turning left into Globe Lane, there are bus signs on either side of the entrance to the bus lane corresponding to diagram 953 of the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions but no roadmarkings.
5. The other side of the cross roads from Medway Street is a pedestrian area, not a through road.

Mindful of the principle that strong reasons are required to allow an appeal where the signage is arguably technically compliant, I have nevertheless reached the firm conclusion that the signage in relation to the Globe lane bus lane is
inadequate. The adequacy of signage cannot be judged in isolation but must be considered in the context of the road system and how it is experienced by drivers. I reach my conclusion for the following reasons:

a. The central problem with the road system is the unacknowledged fact that Medway Road is a dead end. There is nowhere for the private motorist to go after the pedestrian crossing at the junction of Medway Street and Globe Lane. The 20 MPH speed limit sign located at this junction contributes to the misleading impression that a driver can continue past the junction with Globe Lane whereas in fact he can turn neither left nor right.

As for the council’s submission that “when you approach the end of Medway Street with the junction of Globe Lane, you are permitted to Case Number MW 06559G continue straight ahead to enter Military Road and gain access to Chatham High Street”, there must be confusion here because the other side of the crossroads is not a road at all. I am not aware of its technical status but it appears to be a pedestrian zone. The proposition that a driver can properly
extricate himself by performing a u-turn in the centre of this crossroads, busy with buses and pedestrians, is perhaps the clearest demonstration of the failure of this road system.

b. The driver who reaches the end of Medway Street, observes the 20 MPH sign, negotiates the pedestrian crossing and then turns left is then faced with something that looks like a bus station but also like a road. As with Mrs New, the driver unfamiliar with this location is likely to drive cautiously because immediately in front is another hazard in the form of a pedestrian crossing.

Having heard Mrs New’s evidence, viewed the video and visited the site, I am satisfied that a careful driver’s primary focus would be on the pedestrian crossing and that the existing signage, which is adjacent to the crossing, is  insufficient to give adequate warning of the presence of the bus lane. I note that a similar conclusion has been reached by my colleague Adjudicator Nicholls in MW06610B and I agree with his reasoning.
I therefore allow this appeal on the basis that the signage is inadequate in the context of a confusing road system.

This decision is based on the evidence in this case and I have given only very limited evidential weight to the fact that more than 13000 PCNs have been issued for like alleged contraventions, although the council may wish to reflect on this when considering the future of this road system.

John O'Higgins Adjudicator

2 December 2012
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: The Bald Eagle on 06 December, 2012, 03:27:19 PM
And it gets worse. Mr O'Higgins refers to another adjudication in his judgment and I have managed to grab a copy of it. Guess what. "The alleged contravention did not occur" due to the council's failures under regulation 18 Local Authorities' Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996.

I may need to refresh your memory here, because these were the exact terms used in the Hemel Hempstead judgment that eventually forced them to repay all their ill gotten gains. Medway can't say we didn't warn them though. And as it turns out (see below) they were warned by the adjudicator too!

-------------------------------------------------------------

Case Number MW 06610B

Adjudicator’s Decision

xxxxxxx and Medway Council
Penalty Charge Notice MW99753340 £60.00

Appeal allowed on the ground that the alleged contravention did not occur.


I direct the Council to cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and Notice to Owner.

Reasons

The PCN is dated 9 August 2012 and was issued by post in respect of a contravention on 5 August 2012 at 15:02 relating to vehicle LR55CNK in Globe Lane (north west arm) for being in a bus lane. The request to appeal was, in effect, submitted by Mr. Child in an e-mail dated 1 October 2012. He did not specify what type of hearing, if any, he requested and his appeal has been decided on the basis of the documents and written comments that he has made both to the Council and to this Tribunal.

The Council has submitted a bundle of evidence and their written comments. The council has provided a short extract of video which shows, without question, that Mr. Child's vehicle was driven through the bus lane at Globe Lane, north west arm. In his e-mail to the Council of 16 August 2012 it seems that he accepted the fact that the vehicle had driven through the bus lane although he says that he was following a satellite navigation system at the time and did not realise that he was in the bus lane.

The council rejected his representations. Certainly, following any form of map, whether electronic or on paper, does not absolve the driver from the general requirement to observe and comply with the relevant instructions and restrictions indicated on road traffic signs. That reason for Mr. Child travelling through the bus lane cannot be accepted as a matter of law as sufficient to set aside the penalty charge.

The second issue arises whether the signage provided of this bus lane is sufficient for a reasonable, prudent and careful motorist to observe and understand the nature of the restrictions. The council's obligations arise under regulation 18 Local Authorities' Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996 and are to provide signs which give "adequate information" of the relevant restriction. It is right to say that this  particular bus lane has over the last nine months or so given rise to a great many appeals, almost all of which have challenged the sufficiency of the signs.

It is clear from the evidence that there are two ways that a vehicle may approach this bus lane, either coming down Waterfront Way through a different bus lane when the Globe Lane north-western arm bus lane will be straight ahead, or along Medway Street and turning to the left. I have previously concluded that for traffic travelling down Waterfront Way the advance warning signs of the Globe Lane north-western arm bus lane are inadequate because,
simply, there are no advance warning signs and no road markings.

Traffic approaching Medway Street passes two advance warning signs which comply with the requirements of the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 which sets out the prescribed form of such signs. What the council has not used, however, is any road marking to warn of the approach of the Globe Lane bus lane or, alternatively, to give traffic a direction it must follow to avoid the bus lane. In reality, a vehicle which comes along Medway Street to the start of the bus lane must turn around and go back to avoid travelling in the bus lane. I have been satisfied in other appeals that there is, physically, sufficient space to do so, especially as there is a short spur of Military Road on the opposite side of the junction which can be used. Those considerations are, however, only appropriate where it is clear the motorist had observed the bus lane and was seeking to avoid contravening the restriction.

In this appeal, Mr. Child maintains that he did not observe the bus lane and did not realise that he was likely to be contravening the regulations. As he points out, he is not a local resident and cannot be assumed to be familiar with the road layout. Equally, he is not a person who is likely to have seen the advertising of this bus lane which the council undertook prior to its implementation or the local press reporting of concerns about the signs, which have been exhibited in other appeals. The signs which the council uses must have in contemplation drivers with the level of unfamiliarity that Mr. Child has when determining the signs to be used.

Whilst the blue roundels shown on the video at the commencement of the bus lane (TSRGD diagram 953) are clearly displayed, the Traffic Signs Manual published by the Department for Transport recognises that without equivalent road markings, those signs may not by themselves give adequate information (see Chapter 5, paragraph 1.6 et sec).
Chapter 5, paragraph 17.18 gives advice on the use of road markings for bus only streets, such as Globe Lane (north west arm), as follows:

17.18 Where streets are reserved for the use of buses only, or buses and trams, or buses and cycles, the entry should be marked with diagram 1048.3 BUS ONLY, 1048.2 TRAM & BUS ONLY or 1048.4 BUS AND (cycle symbol) ONLY as appropriate.

In chapter 3, paragraph 1.5 the TSM states: “should” indicates a course of action that is strongly recommended and represents good practice.

On the approach to this bus lane the council has opted not to use any road markings other than a pedestrian crossing immediately after the restriction signs, although that crossing does not have any zigzag lines on the approaches. Although the video shows that there were no pedestrians crossing at the time when Mr. Child approached, there can be no doubt that the positioning of this crossing so close to the commencement of the bus lane when there have been no warning road markings on that approach is likely in certain circumstances to cause confusion to the motorist, particularly in assessing the relevant priorities.

I take into consideration the decision of the High Court in R v The Bus Lane Adjudicator and another, ex parte Oxfordshire County Council [2010] EWHC 894 (Admin) which decided that where the local authority had displayed the signs prescribed in TSRGD, had complied with the directions in TSRGD, had acted in accordance with any authorisations given by the Secretary of State for Transport, had complied, so far as possible, with the guidance given by the Department for Transport in the Traffic Signs Manual, and provided the signs have not been placed in
positions where they may be obscured by vegetation or other street furniture and are clearly visible, there must be strong reasons for concluding that those signs failed to comply with the council's duty under regulation 18.

I have considered very carefully the available evidence in this appeal and I have previously voiced my concerns directly to the Council in telephone hearings of other appeals.

There is no reason in this appeal to doubt the credibility of Mr. Child's explanations and I accept, in particular, his lack of familiarity with the area. I have reached the conclusion that in the absence of any form of road markings either indicating the proximity of the bus lane or directing traffic to take another route, the use of diagram 953 alone in this location without any such additional road marking does not comply with the guidance in the TSM, does not give adequate information to the motorist and does not meet the council’s regulation 18 duty.

Accordingly, I find that this contravention did not occur and that this penalty charge notice does not have to be paid. This appeal is allowed.

C J E Nicholls Adjudicator

23 November 2012
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: Boyo on 06 December, 2012, 05:49:50 PM
That's great news - well done to all those who've been working on this.  :aplude: :aplude: :aplude: :dancing: :dancing: :dancing:
I mean how much more telling do the Council need? <_>  Evidently even the adjudicator was letting them know there was a problem.

Quote
I have previously voiced my concerns directly to the Council in telephone hearings of other appeals.


Now I wonder if Medway will do the honourable, decent thing and refund the 13,000 odd fines? Hmm, I suspect they'll try and weasel their way out of it somehow (remember Herts CC wanting people to donate their fines to some none specified charity? W:T:F:)
The ominous prospect of having to refund hundreds of thousands of pounds hasn't come at the best time for the Council either what with the additional cuts for local government demanded in the autumn statement next year and beyond - still, it's not as if they hadn't been warned - they just chose not too listen.  :o
I know it's a bit of a cliche, but I hope this serves as a reminder to this supercilious council and their "we know best attitude", that they are public servants and their principal task is to serve the public and not themselves. :bashy:

I await the Council's next move with interest.
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: Pat Pending on 06 December, 2012, 09:11:21 PM
Well done all concerned.  :aplude: :aplude: :aplude:
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: javabike on 07 December, 2012, 02:09:26 AM
Most impressive and the begiinning of the end of Medway's council aloftness. Next step major campaign to reinburse all the motorists else fraud springs to mind. If it is not legal then taking money is fraud.
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: The Bald Eagle on 09 December, 2012, 04:56:05 PM
And STILL they won't give in. Apparently it's now the TPT's fault FFS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :bashy: :bashy: :bashy:
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: Ewan Hoosami on 09 December, 2012, 09:37:34 PM
"The council is not out to trip anyone up," he said. "We get a large number of vulnerable pedestrians in the bus station so we want to get to a position where we are not issuing any tickets."      (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-cartoon-022.gif) (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons.php)


If the evidence suggests we would be unsuccessful, we'd admit we were wrong. hire a more expensive barrister to go to the high court because money's no object.

Looking at the blue signs in dispute, Mr. McGrath admitted it would take an "advanced driver" to fully comprehend their implications.      W:T:F:




I like the smaller story on the right as well. The one where £500k has been poured into an unfinished car park. It's unclear whether the £370k bung to Arriva is included in this or additional but either way it's a massive amount of spond. Who knows what sort of monkeys Medway would get if they weren't paying top salaries?
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: EDW2000 on 12 January, 2013, 12:16:59 AM
since the TPT wins has there been any changes to signs?

It seems that they are still issuing.


Also the PCN wording seems defective.

Might be time to power up the scooter.


Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: The Bald Eagle on 12 January, 2013, 09:38:29 AM
since the TPT wins has there been any changes to signs?

It seems that they are still issuing.


Also the PCN wording seems defective.

Might be time to power up the scooter.




A letter will shortly be sent to all councilors and one or two from the Medway parking department.

Watch this space. ;)

In the meantime there is nothing to stop you going down to the bus station to assist unfortunate citizens with the signs' visibility.
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: Pat Pending on 12 January, 2013, 11:17:30 AM
We have our suspicions about a couple of others as well!  :rotfl:
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: EDW2000 on 12 January, 2013, 12:27:14 PM
There is a live case, regarding Globe Lane, Chatham, NW Arm.

Is there more than one bus lane/bus gate near the bus station?

I have asked for a site map.
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: Ewan Hoosami on 12 January, 2013, 01:31:25 PM
That's a bloody good question, EDW. See my map below. The focus of attention is currently on the junction of Medway Street/Globe Lane/Military road (denoted by the red dollar sign). Look on street view and you will see the, ahem, adequate signage. There are also, as you ask, two other points of interest which I have not heard the Medway $chunters mention.

Again on street view, head north along the A231 The Brook and you will see no reason why you may not turn left into Globe Lane. As you stop at the lights there you may spot some "adequate signage" obscured by the traffic light pole.

Next, head north on Railway Street and turn left into Waterfront way. You might as well go straight across the mini roundabout because the "adequate signage" here is halfway across the chuffin' car park.

I don't know if any filming is done at these two extra locations or if you are picked up at Medway Street and done on the assumption that to be there, you must have gone through the restrictions. Interestingly, clicking the street view increment arrows from the southern location, you will see that the Google car, along with a couple of near identical Zafiras, drove the full length of Waterfront Way!

Adequate signage my hairy f :o cking a :o se!
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: EDW2000 on 12 January, 2013, 01:51:25 PM
The wording is not compliant but whether or not it's enough for a win I can't say. If we win on this then major blow to
Medway and hopefully local media will cover the win.

The $ sign location is shocking. If you turn right or left you go through a bus gate. Never seen that before.

The advance warning signs are placed after the last junction so all you can do is a u-turn, impossible for an HGV.
I would love to take this to adjudication.

Dear Sir,

This request relates to bus lane enforcement.

please supply the following information:

I would like the Traffic Penalty Tribunal case numbers for all successful appeals relating to
Globe Lane, NW Arm, for the contravention of being in a bus lane/gate or similar contraventions.

I am already aware of case numbers -

MW 06559G
MW 06610B

and would like to know what changes to the bus lanes in Globe Lane
have been made or will be made or are being considered as a result of the Adjudicator's finding
that the scheme is not adequately signed.

Please state:

Why has the guidance (extract attached herewith) on page 141 of chapter 3 of The Traffic Signs Manual shown
by Figure 15-14 (Example of a two-way bus gate) not been followed in Globe Lane in that: -

there is no road marking design 1048.3 or 1048.4 at the bus gates in the bus station

no road signs to design 612 and 613 - 'No Right/Left Turn' (with exception plate) on either side of the junction
with  Medway Street

Why are there no road signs to design 962 - 'Bus Lane at Road Junction Ahead' on either side of the junction with Medway Street.

The pedestrian crossing in Globe Lane near to the junction with Medway Street is not marked with any
zig-zag lines and does follow any diagram in The Zebra, Pelican and Puffin Pedestrian Crossings Regulations and General Directions 1997,
please explain why this is.


Please reply by email.
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: Monkey Girl on 13 January, 2013, 06:58:34 PM
We spoke to a Medway Council employee, The Bust Station Manager, on Sat whilst $CHUNTING  there.

They are contemplating in making improvements to make the bus Lane more visible.

Thank you for listening Medway Council,  but you really should have acted before you made a fortune from the public,

We will wait and see what happens next  :D
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: The Bald Eagle on 13 January, 2013, 07:23:48 PM
We will wait and see what happens next  :D


Funny you should say that MG because what happens next is this. ;)

http://notomob.co.uk/discussions/index.php/topic,2567.0.html (http://notomob.co.uk/discussions/index.php/topic,2567.0.html)
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: EDW2000 on 14 January, 2013, 09:30:33 AM
Look at the advance warning sign - cycle, local bus, taxi,


now look at the bus station sign - local bus, taxi.


So cycles not allowed in bus station, but there are two signs saying cycle lane.

Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: beanz on 16 January, 2013, 11:16:29 AM
Hi all,

I have just received a PCN from Medway Council for a bus lane contravention from 27/12/2012 when i entered Globe Lane from Medway Street, it's the first time I had driven in Chatham in ages and I was trying to get from Staples to the Historic Dockyard when I used this route, can I use the findings of the TCT's listed above in my fight against the PCN????

Thanks in advance. :( :( :(
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: The Bald Eagle on 16 January, 2013, 12:16:31 PM
Hi all,

I have just received a PCN from Medway Council for a bus lane contravention from 27/12/2012 when i entered Globe Lane from Medway Street, it's the first time I had driven in Chatham in ages and I was trying to get from Staples to the Historic Dockyard when I used this route, can I use the findings of the TCT's listed above in my fight against the PCN????

Thanks in advance. :( :( :(


Take a look at my letter to the council on this thread beanz.

http://notomob.co.uk/discussions/index.php/topic,2567.0.html (http://notomob.co.uk/discussions/index.php/topic,2567.0.html)

You will see I quote three cases (Willson, Child and New) and that they cover the approach to Globe lane from two different directions.

In my opinion no one here could or should advise you as to what evidence you could or should be presenting to the TPT. What cannot be condoned are persons who take these cases as an excuse to use the bus lane with impunity.

However, if it is a genuine mistake and a one off... <_>
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: EDW2000 on 16 January, 2013, 12:37:25 PM
It seems they are now not contesting some appeals.

A FOI request to find out why might be interesting.



Another sign inadequate case.


Case Number MW 06556J
Page 1 of 1
Adjudicator’s Decision
xxxxxxx
and
Medway Council
Penalty Charge Notice MW99680575 £60.00
Appeal allowed on the ground that the alleged contravention did not
occur.
I direct the Council to cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and Notice to
Owner.
Reasons
This matter came before me as a personal hearing in London on 18th October
2012. The Appellant appeared, together with her husband xxxxxxxxxx, who
was the driver of the vehicle at the relevant time. The Council did not attend. I
therefore considered the matter on the basis of the oral representations of the
Appellant and her witness and the written representations of the Council.
On Friday, 24th February 2012, the Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) was issued by
post to the Appellant in relation to a contravention which is alleged to have
occurred on 19th May 2012 at 10.16 in Globe Lane, Chatham (North Western
Arm) for being in in a Bus Lane.
The evidence is quite clear that the Appellant’s vehicle was in the bus lane. The
basis of the appeal is that the signage was inadequate. I have been provided
with a very lengthy and detailed file in connection with this matter. I have also
drawn to my attention the decisions of my fellow adjudicators, John Parker and
Chris Nicholls, in the case of MW 06548L, the case of Peter Wilson and Medway
Council in relation to a contravention which is alleged to have occurred on 8th
June 2012 which is the same area. I am satisfied from the evidence presented to
me that Mr Horbury, who was driving the vehicle, in fact approached the bus lane
where the contravention is alleged to have occurred from Waterfront Way. In
those circumstances, the case is on identical facts to that decided by Mr Parker
and Mr Nicholls. I am satisfied that everything that Mr Nicholls says in that
Judgement applies in this case and accordingly I am satisfied that the signage
was inadequate and accordingly I allow the Appeal.

Andrew Keenan

Adjudicator 9 November 2012
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: The Bald Eagle on 16 January, 2013, 01:30:28 PM
It seems they are now not contesting some appeals.

A FOI request to find out why might be interesting.



Another sign inadequate case.


Case Number MW 06556J
Page 1 of 1
Adjudicator’s Decision
xxxxxxx
and
Medway Council
Penalty Charge Notice MW99680575 £60.00
Appeal allowed on the ground that the alleged contravention did not
occur.
I direct the Council to cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and Notice to
Owner.
Reasons
This matter came before me as a personal hearing in London on 18th October
2012. The Appellant appeared, together with her husband xxxxxxxxxx, who
was the driver of the vehicle at the relevant time. The Council did not attend. I
therefore considered the matter on the basis of the oral representations of the
Appellant and her witness and the written representations of the Council.
On Friday, 24th February 2012, the Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) was issued by
post to the Appellant in relation to a contravention which is alleged to have
occurred on 19th May 2012 at 10.16 in Globe Lane, Chatham (North Western
Arm) for being in in a Bus Lane.
The evidence is quite clear that the Appellant’s vehicle was in the bus lane. The
basis of the appeal is that the signage was inadequate. I have been provided
with a very lengthy and detailed file in connection with this matter. I have also
drawn to my attention the decisions of my fellow adjudicators, John Parker and
Chris Nicholls, in the case of MW 06548L, the case of Peter Wilson and Medway
Council in relation to a contravention which is alleged to have occurred on 8th
June 2012 which is the same area. I am satisfied from the evidence presented to
me that Mr Horbury, who was driving the vehicle, in fact approached the bus lane
where the contravention is alleged to have occurred from Waterfront Way. In
those circumstances, the case is on identical facts to that decided by Mr Parker
and Mr Nicholls. I am satisfied that everything that Mr Nicholls says in that
Judgement applies in this case and accordingly I am satisfied that the signage
was inadequate and accordingly I allow the Appeal.

Andrew Keenan

Adjudicator 9 November 2012


Where did you get that EDW?
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: EDW2000 on 16 January, 2013, 03:33:25 PM
TPT gave it to me because I am preparing case for a punter.

The idea is to go to TPT and ask for costs if he wins
because they know the signs are inadequate.




Dear Sir
 
Thank you for your enquiry.
 
I attach some allowed decisions relating to Globe Lane. If you require any more, we would need  the appellant name or case reference.
 
We do not know when the decisions will be available on-line.
 
Yours sincerely
 
Stuart Wilson
 
Stuart Wilson
Tribunal Information Officer
Traffic Penalty Tribunal
Barlow House
Minshull Street
Manchester
M1 3DZ.
 
Tel : (0161) 242 5286
Fax: (0161) 242 5265
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: Lizzyp on 22 January, 2013, 08:55:21 PM
Hi, this is my first time on a forum, today I received a PCN for a bus lane intervention on globe lane, Chatham, north western arm. I do not live in the area and would never willingly or knowingly go into a bus lane. I did however pay the fine as I figure that you never win!  I am going to drive to the area again tomorrow and see for myself lest I should make the same expensive mistake again. I am all up for motorists being fined for being idiots or unsafe but I am so angry as I am a good, safe and usually vigilant driver. Can I claim my fine back after the event? Has anyone been successful ?apparently my crime was committed on 8th Jan, has the council made any changes to signage at all since these disputes started?
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: peperami gsxr on 23 January, 2013, 02:13:46 PM
Welcome Lizzyp.

Can I claim my fine back after the event?



Watch this space is the answer, you wont be able to claim back your money, but the council should offer it to you all being well, we will have to see if they play ball. 

See this link, which in the first post  your find a letter which explains things clearly to the Medway Council sent on the 13th Jan.

http://notomob.co.uk/discussions/index.php/topic,2567.0.html (http://notomob.co.uk/discussions/index.php/topic,2567.0.html)

Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: EDW2000 on 23 January, 2013, 09:38:41 PM
NEW MEAT



BUS LANE PENALTY CHARGE NOTICE XXXXXXXXXX

I refer to your recent appeal regarding the above Bus Lane Penalty Charge Notice.

I would advise that in accordance with the Traffic Management Act 2004 it is the registered keeper of the vehicle who is liable for the penalty charge and not the driver. The onus lies with the owner to pursue the driver for payment.

I can also confirm that the signage in question is fully compliant with the requirements of the road traffic legislation.

I have however noted that you are not from the area and am prepared to allow you a first occasion and am therefore pleased to advise you that the Bus Lane Penalty Charge Notice has been cancelled on this occasion only.

If however you receive a further Penalty Charge Notice for the same contravention then I can advise that this will be upheld.

Yours sincerely,




D Gillan
Medway Council


Di Gillan/Appeals Officer/Parking Services

Annexe B/Civic Centre/Strood/Rochester/Kent/ME2 4AU

Tel: 01634-332266/Fax: 01634-331777

Email: parking@medway.gov.uk
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: Pat Pending on 23 January, 2013, 11:01:49 PM
So will they be repaying all previous Penalty's that were contested by people from out of the area?
How far is out of the area?
Is this not discrimination against Local people (who pay their wages)
 :idea:

If I had had my challenge turned down I would now quite rightly be claiming discrimination!
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: The Bald Eagle on 24 January, 2013, 12:46:17 PM
NEW MEAT



BUS LANE PENALTY CHARGE NOTICE XXXXXXXXXX

I refer to your recent appeal regarding the above Bus Lane Penalty Charge Notice.

I would advise that in accordance with the Traffic Management Act 2004 it is the registered keeper of the vehicle who is liable for the penalty charge and not the driver. The onus lies with the owner to pursue the driver for payment.

I can also confirm that the signage in question is fully compliant with the requirements of the road traffic legislation.

I have however noted that you are not from the area and am prepared to allow you a first occasion and am therefore pleased to advise you that the Bus Lane Penalty Charge Notice has been cancelled on this occasion only.

If however you receive a further Penalty Charge Notice for the same contravention then I can advise that this will be upheld.

Yours sincerely,




D Gillan
Medway Council


Di Gillan/Appeals Officer/Parking Services

Annexe B/Civic Centre/Strood/Rochester/Kent/ME2 4AU

Tel: 01634-332266/Fax: 01634-331777

Email: parking@medway.gov.uk


What date was this EDW?
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: EDW2000 on 24 January, 2013, 03:00:30 PM
I think it was dated about 21 Jan.

Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: The Bald Eagle on 24 January, 2013, 06:18:44 PM
I think it was dated about 21 Jan.

A definite date would be useful. Are you in touch with the recipient of this letter EDW, and if so would he/she be prepared to contact us?
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: EDW2000 on 24 January, 2013, 07:39:33 PM
I will PM him but not know him personally.

http://notomob.co.uk/discussions/index.php?action=forum (http://notomob.co.uk/discussions/index.php?action=forum)


I just did his pcn appeal.
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: melville-vs-medway on 25 January, 2013, 12:54:49 AM
Hi

Medway council have recently added a photo of the chatham bus station to their flickr feed...

Shall I add a comment and link to here or to BE's rather excellent letter page...?


Posted to Flickr    January 24, 2013 at 1.51PM GMT
Taken on    October 10, 2011 at 11.11AM GMT


http://www.flickr.com/photos/medwaycouncil/8410365431/##meta/in/photostream (http://www.flickr.com/photos/medwaycouncil/8410365431/#meta/)


I'm asking as not sure of the web / forum etiquette  <_>


Paul
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: The Bald Eagle on 25 January, 2013, 02:47:27 PM
Hi

Medway council have recently added a photo of the chatham bus station to their flickr feed...

Shall I add a comment and link to here or to BE's rather excellent letter page...?


Posted to Flickr    January 24, 2013 at 1.51PM GMT
Taken on    October 10, 2011 at 11.11AM GMT


[url]http://www.flickr.com/photos/medwaycouncil/8410365431/##meta/in/photostream[/url] ([url]http://www.flickr.com/photos/medwaycouncil/8410365431/#meta/[/url])


I'm asking as not sure of the web / forum etiquette  <_>


Paul


Why not do both Paul?
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: robocop on 18 February, 2013, 04:50:52 PM
Hi All.

I too got a £30/60 fine for going through this bus route on the 24th November. Stupidly and sadly I paid this as soon as I got it, to avoid the extra £30 fine. I can't afford £30 now and I certainly couldn't afford it then.

I know someone already asked this, but what chances of them paying back my £30 and what can I do to help this cause?

I don't think I had ever been to Chatham before that day, certainly I have never driven there. I like between Ashford and Maidstone.

Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: robocop on 18 February, 2013, 04:59:50 PM
By the way, the girl on KMFM was talking this morning about how she has been hit 3 times by this fine. This is what reminded me of my fine, and prompted me to google the situation.

Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: EDW2000 on 18 February, 2013, 07:15:39 PM
Hi All.

I too got a £30/60 fine for going through this bus route on the 24th November. Stupidly and sadly I paid this as soon as I got it, to avoid the extra £30 fine. I can't afford £30 now and I certainly couldn't afford it then.

I know someone already asked this, but what chances of them paying back my £30 and what can I do to help this cause?

I don't think I had ever been to Chatham before that day, certainly I have never driven there. I like between Ashford and Maidstone.



email and ask for a refund.

they will refuse
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: robocop on 19 February, 2013, 09:27:58 AM

email and ask for a refund.

they will refuse
Not the most helpful advice ever but thanks all the same.

Anything I can do to help the cause, other than getting out on the streets of medway with a camera? (rather far from me)
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: EDW2000 on 19 February, 2013, 01:15:03 PM
You have no legal options, once you have paid that is it. Game over.

Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: melville-vs-medway on 19 February, 2013, 02:06:45 PM
You have no legal options, once you have paid that is it. Game over.



Hi EDW2000


I kind of think now is the time to make a challenge on this "admission of guilt" seeing as appeals have been successful. Robocop was forced to make a payment under duress for fear of the fine escalating...  ;)

Isn't that WHY councils add the 50% discount to ensure victims pay up...


Hi Robocop..

Some good info here for future reference.. Pass it on to friends etc so others might have a chance to fight them.

http://www.ticketfighter.co.uk/appeals.htm (http://www.ticketfighter.co.uk/appeals.htm)

NoToMob are not the only ones onto this PCN cash cow for councils.

http://www.penaltychargenotice.co.uk/news/ (http://www.penaltychargenotice.co.uk/news/) Shocking just how much money this makes for councils.
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: EDW2000 on 19 February, 2013, 02:45:19 PM
You have no one left to appeal to once you have paid.

I dont think the High Court would hear the case.

Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: melville-vs-medway on 19 February, 2013, 04:09:44 PM
Hi EDW2000

I'm sure somewhere I've read of payments being snatched back through credit card companies.
Think it was something to do with not receiving a receipt for payment.. It would have been back in 2008 I read it on the web on a site like Honest John or similar. Searching for it now is so hard with all the councils websites having PCN details...  ::)))
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: robocop on 19 February, 2013, 05:30:43 PM
Hi Robocop..

Some good info here for future reference.. Pass it on to friends etc so others might have a chance to fight them.

[url]http://www.ticketfighter.co.uk/appeals.htm[/url] ([url]http://www.ticketfighter.co.uk/appeals.htm[/url])

NoToMob are not the only ones onto this PCN cash cow for councils.

[url]http://www.penaltychargenotice.co.uk/news/[/url] ([url]http://www.penaltychargenotice.co.uk/news/[/url]) Shocking just how much money this makes for councils.


Thanks Melville. I'll have a read of those. As someone who hasn't heard a lot about this, what success rate are people having with fighting these charges?
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: EDW2000 on 19 February, 2013, 06:02:07 PM
Hi EDW2000

I'm sure somewhere I've read of payments being snatched back through credit card companies.
Think it was something to do with not receiving a receipt for payment.. It would have been back in 2008 I read it on the web on a site like Honest John or similar. Searching for it now is so hard with all the councils websites having PCN details...  ::)))


A visa charge back would lead to the bailiffs.
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: PhilT on 04 June, 2013, 06:32:16 PM
I fell for this crap a couple of weeks ago, collecting my daughter from Uni.

Get to the end of Medway street and was confronted with two bus lane signs to the right and left, a pedestrian area straight ahead and a silly loop road thing to the left bringing me back to effectively the same place. WTF !

As I wanted to get to the Historic Dockyard I turned left and got a ticket in the post. I noticed that to the right the road surface was correctly marked as a Bus Lane, but to the left was not. A police car also happened to amble along from the left.

I shall be appealing I think.
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: The Bald Eagle on 04 June, 2013, 07:16:34 PM
I fell for this crap a couple of weeks ago, collecting my daughter from Uni.

Get to the end of Medway street and was confronted with two bus lane signs to the right and left, a pedestrian area straight ahead and a silly loop road thing to the left bringing me back to effectively the same place. WTF !

As I wanted to get to the Historic Dockyard I turned left and got a ticket in the post. I noticed that to the right the road surface was correctly marked as a Bus Lane, but to the left was not. A police car also happened to amble along from the left.

I shall be appealing I think.

Appeal it mate, and if they don't accept your appeal at the council stage, take it to the TPT. The council are shit scared that the TPT will rule that the whole scheme is unenforceable and I can pretty much guarantee they won't let it get that far.
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: melville-vs-medway on 05 June, 2013, 03:45:47 AM
Hi...

Here we go PhilT.... add this to your challenge and say you were directed this way and mislead by the signage..  ::)))

I posted this on the NoToMobFacebook page.. (https://www.facebook.com/NoToMob)

The traffic signs from Rochester, Corporation Street are still directing drivers to the dockyard along the Rochester / Chatham High street. Surely if drivers are then re-directed to continue past Medway St and up Manor Rd it would be better and safer to send them via the A2 up Star Hill.


Quote
Hi... I'm sure this sign directs traffic to the Chatham Dockyard along the Chatham High Street from Rochester.

It directs Gillingham and Rainham traffic via the A2...
And dockyard traffic in the other lane which would be the high street...

Have a look I've linked to the google street map and I'm sure the sign is still there..

[url]http://goo.gl/maps/fhH5Y[/url] ([url]http://goo.gl/maps/fhH5Y[/url])


Quote
And here road markings clearly show the A2 as straight on up Star Hill so the Dockyard sign would be the Rochester / Chatham High street into Chatham town center which is probably why so many drivers get confused and lost when they reach the Chatham Bus station and get caught out by the $cameras..

These show just how fractured, incomplete and unreliable the signage is all around here in Medway because of this bus station and the inept planning by the "money grabbing stoopid numpties" at the council

[url]http://goo.gl/maps/N9mxc[/url] ([url]http://goo.gl/maps/N9mxc[/url])




And I cycled into Chatham today and took the scenic route of New Rd and down Manor Rd and it's in a terrible state. Manor Rd just cannot cope with the traffic along with parking either side and the road surface is pot-holed and worn out so bad it's dangerous. The surface is broken up and loose and an accident waiting to happen if a car should need to brake hard and emergency stop.

Every time I cycle down Manor Rd I come across cars turning into Manor Rd from the high St and cutting the corner at the bottom because it's a sharp turn and pretty much a blind corner with the buildings, being so narrow and the two roads don't meet at 90' degrees.


Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: aruna56 on 06 June, 2013, 12:27:41 PM
Just got a bus lane pcn while trying to get to Dickens World on 24 May 2013.... was just following the sat nav. Am not familiar with the town and it was meant to be a  birthday treat for my 87 year old Aunt Got the notice 2 days ago    :'( and was  wondering if i should appeal given that so many people have had a similar notice. Please advice.
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: The Bald Eagle on 06 June, 2013, 05:07:53 PM
Just got a bus lane pcn while trying to get to Dickens World on 24 May 2013.... was just following the sat nav. Am not familiar with the town and it was meant to be a  birthday treat for my 87 year old Aunt Got the notice 2 days ago    :'( and was  wondering if i should appeal given that so many people have had a similar notice. Please advice.

Please see my reply #42 above aruna56. And if you do appeal it, please let us know how you get on. Also, we can help if you like. I'm sure there are plenty of members who would be willing to help if you ask.

Most of us don't bite, although if I were you, I wouldn't get your fingers too close to Killswitch's mouth when he's tucking in to one of his heart attack on a plate breakfasts. ;D
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: Kill Switch on 06 June, 2013, 10:26:09 PM
Most of us don't bite, although if I were you, I wouldn't get your fingers too close to Killswitch's mouth when he's tucking in to one of his heart attack on a plate breakfasts. ;D


Damn right (http://yoursmiles.org/tsmile/agressive/t0103.gif) (http://yoursmiles.org/t-agressive.php)
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: bertiebear on 02 July, 2013, 06:58:52 PM
Just wanted to say a big thank you.

In may we were visiting chatham docks, following satnav, watching the road when 2 guys in yellow jackets flagged us down. They advised us about the bus lane we had just entered... explained the local protests and gave us a NOTO MOB card. So when the penalty arrived, we used the info on this site to wite an appropriate response.

We also added in that Stroud (glos) has a bus station right on its msain road through the town without feeling the need to ban cars for revenue ..sorry  "health and safety" reasons. Cheltenham also has its bus station alongside a key road.

The fine was cancelled but it took 3 weeks to get a response.  :dancing:
So thank you very much Guys.
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: Ewan Hoosami on 02 July, 2013, 10:55:23 PM
Good for you bertie. One less victim of the traffic taliban is always good news.

(http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-signs060.gif) (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys.php)
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: The Bald Eagle on 02 July, 2013, 11:11:59 PM
when 2 guys in yellow jackets flagged us down.

 ;)

It's what we do (amongst other things).

Your thanks is gratefully received bertiebear. It is nice to know we are appreciated.

Thank you.

By the way, this ain't finished by any means. There are many thousands more who have been wronged and we will be bringing this to the attention of the appropriate authorities shortly.
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: melville-vs-medway on 03 July, 2013, 06:56:03 AM


By the way, this ain't finished by any means. There are many thousands more who have been wronged and we will be bringing this to the attention of the appropriate authorities shortly.



Hi BE,

There would be so many more if we didn't help out here...

I walk into Chatham to shop and often get the bus back home and my pickup stop is right by the Argos car park, so I sit on the wall at the junction of Medway St and Waterfront Way. For the best part the motorists who arrive here are lost and confused by the signs and directions. I know this because I ask them when I re-direct them back to the High St and Manor Rd...

From Rochester and Strood they are directed here by the signs and road markings at the junction of Corporation St and Star Hill. (http://goo.gl/maps/QkqL0)

Myself like many motorists have a natural compass and when entering Medway St you can see the river medway through the Staples car park (http://goo.gl/maps/dt00p) and once here you know the dockyard is not far along the river. I've assisted drivers visiting Chatham for appointments at the Job Centre, Specsavers and shows at The Chatham Theater. These people aren't thugs or criminals and for the best part they've been polite and grateful for the advice and none I would consider knuckle dragging morons.. And it's not just SatNav it's the signs and road markings leading them here..
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: JasPCN on 12 July, 2013, 01:20:16 PM
Hi,
I am afraid I am another victim. I don't know the area well at all, I travelled up to take my girlfriend to Fort Amherst and my sat nav took me all the way down Medway Street. Arriving at the end of Medway Street I was confronted with a completely obvious bus lane to the right, what looked like a private car park to some offices in front (with a pedestrian zone crossing it??) and a bus station to the left. My sat nav was shouting at me to go left... I saw the bus lane signs to the left, in front and up ahead. But with clearly no other options I presumed that these were for the second part of the station, (you know, where its split in half by that building, I presumed that the signs were for the second road) SO I turned left down the small road with the brick effect surface and then turned left again through the station.

I was genuinely confused and did not know what to do or where to go! I didn't know what law I was contravening though the direction I was going didn't feel right, so I just continued very slowly and very carefully until I got out!

Now I get the fine!

I have looked at google maps now and yes all the signs are obvious, but even looking on maps now, I still don't know which way I am supposed to go????

And this is all coming from someone who has received professional driver training on the level of A.I.M!

I will be contesting this... I do hope some of you may be able to help me with 'best tactics'

Thanks.
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: The Bald Eagle on 12 July, 2013, 04:10:23 PM
@JasPCN

First of all, when did you commit the alleged contravention? They have changed all of the signs and lines recently and it is important to establish which regime was in place when you are supposed to have committed this most heinous crime (I hope you can recognise sarcasm when you see it :D).
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: JasPCN on 12 July, 2013, 11:54:21 PM
Oh yes, sarcasm noted! It was the 4th of this month... I am in no doubt that the signs were there, but still, it's utterly ridiculous. ::)))
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: The Bald Eagle on 14 July, 2013, 09:11:38 AM
Since you received this ticket on the 4th of this month you will have been confronted by the new road layout, pictures of which are here.

http://notomob.co.uk/discussions/index.php/topic,2863.0.html (http://notomob.co.uk/discussions/index.php/topic,2863.0.html)

During November and December 2012 the Traffic Penalty Tribunal gave decisions which essentially ruled the existing scheme unlawful. If you had received your ticket under the old scheme you would certainly have got away with it on that basis.

However, because we now have this new scheme in place it is basically back to square one, and any ticket challenged at TPT will be adjudicated upon as if this was a new bus lane.

As far as tactics go may I suggest just being truthful. Your first post sums up your thoughts perfectly. Stick with it. It's your best defence.

Also, if you can persuade the adjudicator to do a site inspection I am sure it would help your cause. It is my opinion that this whole system is still a mess, but when it comes down to it my opinion counts for naught. If the adjudicator comes down on your side then all well and good. If not, then at least everyone who makes the mistake after you can be advised accordingly.
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: JasPCN on 14 July, 2013, 01:30:37 PM
Thank you for all your help. Looking at those photos, I mean Jesus... The road markings are horrendous! As a driver, driving in an area you are not familiar with, you try to take in everything, directional signage, safety signage, road markings, pedestrians and other road users whilst making sure your speed is right etc. Arriving at that junction is total sensory overload, you have lines upon lines, even now I don't know what they bloody mean!

I am going to appeal stating this and explaining how I was there for the first time and as a tourist (ironically putting money into Chatham, I was planning on going back to the dockyard, but sod that now). I am going to explain how it was a genuine mistake. If they do not allow it, I am going to then ask EDW2000 who posted item 23 on this thread for his/her ticket number and go back to them saying, how can you have one rule for one and another for me?

I am considering attaching to my email the photo of the Police car (note, not with it's emergency lights activated) doing exactly what I did. Surely with their level of law knowledge and driver training, if they are making the same mistake as me, there must be something wrong!

Thanks again!
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: DastardlyDick on 14 July, 2013, 04:43:23 PM
Personally, I wouldn't include the bit about the Police vehicle as they will have an exemption for patrolling (as well as emergency) purposes, but it's your appeal.
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: The Bald Eagle on 14 July, 2013, 06:45:33 PM
Personally, I wouldn't include the bit about the Police vehicle as they will have an exemption for patrolling (as well as emergency) purposes, but it's your appeal.

I would sling it in anyway. If someone sees a police car performing the same manoeuvre without blues and twos, how is a reasonable person supposed to know what is in a TMO?
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: DastardlyDick on 15 July, 2013, 05:59:11 PM
Personally, I wouldn't include the bit about the Police vehicle as they will have an exemption for patrolling (as well as emergency) purposes, but it's your appeal.

I would sling it in anyway. If someone sees a police car performing the same manoeuvre without blues and twos, how is a reasonable person supposed to know what is in a TMO?

A good point, well presented  8)
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: JasPCN on 24 July, 2013, 02:15:36 PM
So they rejected my appeal... Makes me laugh, they are willing to do over a visitor to the town even though I am investing my money into the area by visiting it's sights, all for a quick buck for them. Just leaves a bad flavour in my mouth and means I won't return to Chatham.

Round 2 then.
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: JasPCN on 24 July, 2013, 02:18:44 PM
NEW MEAT



BUS LANE PENALTY CHARGE NOTICE XXXXXXXXXX

I refer to your recent appeal regarding the above Bus Lane Penalty Charge Notice.

I would advise that in accordance with the Traffic Management Act 2004 it is the registered keeper of the vehicle who is liable for the penalty charge and not the driver. The onus lies with the owner to pursue the driver for payment.

I can also confirm that the signage in question is fully compliant with the requirements of the road traffic legislation.

I have however noted that you are not from the area and am prepared to allow you a first occasion and am therefore pleased to advise you that the Bus Lane Penalty Charge Notice has been cancelled on this occasion only.

If however you receive a further Penalty Charge Notice for the same contravention then I can advise that this will be upheld.

Yours sincerely,




D Gillan
Medway Council


Di Gillan/Appeals Officer/Parking Services

Annexe B/Civic Centre/Strood/Rochester/Kent/ME2 4AU

Tel: 01634-332266/Fax: 01634-331777

Email: parking@medway.gov.uk


I need to find out if this chap will give me his PCN number or details. My appeal circumstances were identical to his but mine was rejected. I want to know why I am being treated differently.
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: dangerous beanz on 24 July, 2013, 05:29:18 PM
"I would advise that in accordance with the Traffic Management Act 2004 it is the registered keeper of the vehicle who is liable for the penalty charge and not the driver. The onus lies with the owner to pursue the driver for payment."

That don't sound right to me.
Title: Re: Medway - Chatham bus lane - TPT state "...the contravention did not occur"
Post by: The Bald Eagle on 25 July, 2013, 11:51:35 AM
I need to find out if this chap will give me his PCN number or details. My appeal circumstances were identical to his but mine was rejected. I want to know why I am being treated differently.


@JasPCN

Don't forget they have only recently changed the road layout and whoever it was who was let off their ticket may not have encountered the same road layout as you. I will explain.

After the TPT made rulings late last year that effectively told the council that the signs and lines were unenforceable because they had failed in their Regulation 18 duties (see here for full details http://notomob.co.uk/discussions/index.php/topic,2567.msg20412.html#msg20412 (http://notomob.co.uk/discussions/index.php/topic,2567.msg20412.html#msg20412) ) someone (and I'm not saying who :-ev-:) put in an FoI request as follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Please provide breakdowns of the following categories, covering the period 3rd December 2012 to 5th March 2013:

In relation only to PCNs issued to motorists for travelling north-eastwards/south-westwards between Medway Street and Dock Lane -

1. The number of PCNs appealed to Medway council.
2. The number of appeals allowed by Medway council
3. The number of appeals denied by Medway council
4. The number of appeals referred to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal (TPT)
5. The number of of appeals allowed by the TPT
6. The number of of appeals denied by the TPT
7. The number of appeals not challenged by Medway council at the TPT

In addition to this, please provide details of the number of appeals currently outstanding at both Medway council and the TPT related to PCNs issued during the period 3rd December 2012 to 5th March 2013.

(b) Please provide breakdowns of the following categories, covering the period 3rd December 2012 to 5th March 2013:

In relation only to PCNs issued to motorists for travelling north-eastwards/south-westwards between the junction with the entrance to the Sir John Hawkins car park, to the junction with Medway Street -

1. The number of PCNs appealed to Medway council.
2. The number of appeals allowed by Medway council
3. The number of appeals denied by Medway council
4. The number of appeals referred to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal (TPT)
5. The number of of appeals allowed by the TPT
6. The number of of appeals denied by the TPT
7. The number of appeals not challenged by Medway council at the TPT

In addition to this, please provide details of the number of appeals currently outstanding at both Medway council and the TPT related to PCNs issued during the period 3rd December 2012 to 5th March 2013.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The significance of these dates is that the 2nd December was the date of the final damning TPT adjudication and 6th March was when Medway council started to make changes to the road layout at the bus station.

Now comes the interesting bit. The reply to the FoI:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Breakdown from 3rd December 2012 to 5th March 2013 for Globe Lane Bus Lane (motorists travelling north eastwards/south westwards between Medway Street and Dock Road

347 appeals to Medway Council
298 appeals allowed by Medway Council
23 appeals dismissed by Medway Council
5 appeals referred to Traffic Penalty Tribunal (TPT)
0 appeals allowed by TPT
0 appeals demised by TPT
5 appeals not challenged by Medway Council to TPT

Breakdown from 3rd December 2012 to 5th March 2013 for Waterfront Way Bus Lane (motorists travelling north eastwards/south westwards between Sir John Hawkins Car Park and Medway Street

112 appeals to Medway Council
85 appeals allowed by Medway Council
7 appeals dismissed by Medway Council
0 appeals referred to Traffic Penalty Tribunal (TPT)
0 appeals allowed by TPT
0 appeals demised by TPT
0 appeals not challenged by Medway Council to TPT

There are no outstanding appeals with Medway Council as all appeals are dealt with within the specified timescales. In addition to the figures above there are currently no appeals outstanding with TPT during that period.

I would like to advise that any irregularities with the figures is due to the way the data is stored, there could be duplication whereby a notice of rejection letter has been created and the PCN is then cancelled this would generate a duplication in numbers.


--------------------------------------------------------------------

Ever since the changes on 6th March 2013 the council have made further changes which include moving signs, adding yet further signs, adding lines on the road and adding green tarmac at the beginning of the bus lanes to denote it as such.

Only time will tell if this has had the desired effect, but it is you JasPCN who appears to be one of its latest victims because clearly it didn't.

Now that they have changed the road layout the council will now go back to rejecting appeals in the hope that the next appeal that goes to TPT will be presented by someone who is ignorant of the rules and regs., and who doesn't challenge the ticket on the correct basis. If that were to happen then they would adopt the same stance as previously by holding it out as a precedent for all future cases.

Fortunately however, we are now ahead of that particular game. If you (JasPCN) would like our help with your appeal to the TPT, please PM me so that we can discuss a strategy.

Stay cool 8)

BE