Bus Lane Fine, Contest?

[vonhosen]

Pete317 said:

vonhosen said:

Pete317 said:

4rephill said:

Garvin said:

...........Clipping a bus lane or having a few inches of your vehicle in a yellow box that does not obstruct traffic causes no disruption whatsoever and, IMHO, most people would prefer a bit of discretion to be exercised rather than fines being issued 'to the letter of the law'.

The Law is black and white for this offence though, and the same for everyone - You either commit the offence or you do not.

If you start to introduce discretion into the equation, you end up in a situation whereby some drivers get done for the offence, whilst other drivers don't get done for the exact same offence - How can that fair be to everyone?

I agree. Everybody who steps on a crack should be fined.

Not likely to be an offence though is it.

Not yet.

But wait until the people who made it an absolute offence to put one wheel onto a bus lane turn their attention to people stepping on cracks...

They're not likely to though, the argument is absurd.

[Red Devil]

Riley Blue said:

Red Devil said:

Riley Blue said:

untakenname said:

It's the sign at the beginning of this video of the incident, just uploaded from my dashcam
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4zxWBzg8s8

The partially obscured sign is one of several bus lane notifications. Had it been the only one, you might have had a case but it isn't, the others are perfectly clear and unobstructed.

Good point. However you're not from the area according to your profile.
So I'm somewhat puzzled by your assertion that there are 'others'.
Where is your evidence? AFAIK there is only one prior indication (see below)

From what I can see on Google, there's a 'Bus lane cameras' sign before the zebra crossing, a curved white painted arrow pointing to the right on the road immediately before the bus lane, the bus lane is a different colour from the other traffic lanes, BUS LANE is written in large white letters soon after the start of the bus lane and repeated further along. I think they're all good indications.

ISWYM, but the only one of those which gives any advance indication is the (wonky) camera warning sign. All of the others are after the Diagram 958 sign which is the one that has legal significance. Especially so in this case as the bus lane is part time. It is perfectly OK to travel in it between 7pm and 7am. You won't know that until the blue/white sign is within your field of view and you can read the times when the restriction is in force.

4rephill said:

Garvin said:

...........Clipping a bus lane or having a few inches of your vehicle in a yellow box that does not obstruct traffic causes no disruption whatsoever and, IMHO, most people would prefer a bit of discretion to be exercised rather than fines being issued 'to the letter of the law'.

The Law is black and white for this offence though, and the same for everyone - You either commit the offence or you do not.

The TPT adjudicator in Kornbluth thought otherwise. Whether he/she was correct to do so is a different issue and a matter of opinion. An aggrieved party (appellant or local authority) can apply for a review under Section 12 - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2007/3482/sched...

Kornbluth is not the first such ruling either. Way back in 2006 a PATAS* adjudicator (Anthony Engel) came to the same conclusion in a similar case against LB Bromley which I became involved with (I was not the appellant).

 * Since renamed London Tribunals.

4rephill said:

If you start to introduce discretion into the equation, you end up in a situation whereby some drivers get done for the offence, whilst other drivers don't get done for the exact same offence - How can that fair be to everyone?

I believe that the de minimis principle is important. Bus lanes exist purely for traffic management purposes not as a method for over zealous local authorities to prop up their budgets. The DoT has provided guidance and expects them to exercise the duty of discretion already granted to them whether or not to enforce. Unfortunately the default response it almost invariably "no, we just want your money so cough up."

Fairness is based on having an established appeal system which can look at the facts and decide accordingly. Previous decisions are an important element of UK jurisprudence. Long may it continue. If you want a rigid codified Napoleonic system you have only to cross the Channel and live in France.

[Pete317]

vonhosen said:

Pete317 said:

vonhosen said:

Pete317 said:

4rephill said:

Garvin said:

...........Clipping a bus lane or having a few inches of your vehicle in a yellow box that does not obstruct traffic causes no disruption whatsoever and, IMHO, most people would prefer a bit of discretion to be exercised rather than fines being issued 'to the letter of the law'.

The Law is black and white for this offence though, and the same for everyone - You either commit the offence or you do not.

If you start to introduce discretion into the equation, you end up in a situation whereby some drivers get done for the offence, whilst other drivers don't get done for the exact same offence - How can that fair be to everyone?

I agree. Everybody who steps on a crack should be fined.

Not likely to be an offence though is it.

Not yet.

But wait until the people who made it an absolute offence to put one wheel onto a bus lane turn their attention to people stepping on cracks...

They're not likely to though, the argument is absurd.

Of course it's absurd - as is the absolute offence of allowing one of your wheels to enter a bus lane for a millisecond.

Edited by Pete317 on Saturday 2nd July 17:33

[vonhosen]

Pete317 said:

Of course it's absurd - as is the absolute offence of allowing one of your wheels to enter a bus lane for a millisecond.

Having an absolute offence of driving in a bus lane (if you are going to have bus lanes) isn't absurd at all. it's the most practical & sensible thing for it, just as is the case for speeding.

Of course if you have one wheel in the bus lane for a millisecond it isn't likely to result in a penalty, just as if you do 31mph in a 30 for a millisecond you aren't likely to either. Do you need more straw yet?

[4rephill]

Pete317 said:

Of course it's absurd - as is the absolute offence of allowing one of your wheels to enter a bus lane for a millisecond.

Edited by Pete317 on Saturday 2nd July 17:33

In the OP's case, he didn't allow a single wheel to enter the bus lane for a millisecond, he had at least half of his car driving down the bus lane for several seconds as he manoeuvred around the car turning right due to being too impatient to simply wait a few seconds.

Where applicable, the Law stipulates that you must not have any part of your vehicle in the bus lane, and the dividing line is normally pretty wide so it's not as though you can accidentally enter the bus lane. There's no time stipulation and there's no percentage of car over the line stipulation.

It's no different to crossing a solid white centre line - You shouldn't be crossing it at all with any of your car, for any amount of time (with certain exceptions), so if you get caught: Tough st!

[Pete317]

vonhosen said:

Pete317 said:

Of course it's absurd - as is the absolute offence of allowing one of your wheels to enter a bus lane for a millisecond.

Having an absolute offence of driving in a bus lane (if you are going to have bus lanes) isn't absurd at all. it's the most practical & sensible thing for it, just as is the case for speeding.

Of course if you have one wheel in the bus lane for a millisecond it isn't likely to result in a penalty, just as if you do 31mph in a 30 for a millisecond you aren't likely to either. Do you need more straw yet?

Hey, you're the one who waded in here

[moles]

I got done the same 2 years ago at 5.30 in the morning on a Sunday with no traffic on the road. I swerved out of camera view to avoid a broken glass bottle in the road and as I was partially in the bus lane as per OP they fined me. I tried explaining this and they basically said provide proof that there was glass in the road, which I obviously couldn't as it was 2 weeks previous. I then said why would I need to be in the bus lane at that time of day on empty roads and they said again tuff st we still want our cash!. I ended up paying as the fine was 50% if paid within 3 weeks.

[2gins]

untakenname said:

Came home today to find I've got a £130 fine for straying into a buslane last weekend





I only went into it (briefly) as the cars infront were turning right, I don't even think all four wheels were in.

Hopefully I've got dashcam footage of the incident as I've only driven once during the week. Will take the card out of my dashcam and link it here if it's still on there.
If I pay within two weeks its half price but I think I'm going to contest as I genuinely feel I didn't cause any issues to other road users, there wasn't any buses in the lane and I went back as soon as I passed the cars and iirc the actual sign was obscured by foliage (placed by the council).
If I do contest and lose do I have to pay full whack if they find against me?

Cheers.

Been there. You're fked. Bang to rights, pay it up while its cheap and learn not to cross the line until the filter lane is open. Whether there's a thrusting red bandit there or not us irrelevant.

[768]

Blaster72 said:

rb5er said:

Getting fined for that is taking the piss. Robbing s.

That about sums it up for me. I feel for you OP.

+1

[Mr Snrub]

768 said:

Blaster72 said:

rb5er said:

Getting fined for that is taking the piss. Robbing s.

That about sums it up for me. I feel for you OP.

+1

+2

Was watching one of those Police Interceptor programmes earlier. Guy was pulled over with a load of good he'd shoplifted, then told the arresting coppers he was a member of ISIS, hoped their wives got beheaded and thier daughters raped


£45 fine

[Pete317]

Mr Snrub said:

768 said:

Blaster72 said:

rb5er said:

Getting fined for that is taking the piss. Robbing s.

That about sums it up for me. I feel for you OP.

+1

+2

Was watching one of those Police Interceptor programmes earlier. Guy was pulled over with a load of good he'd shoplifted, then told the arresting coppers he was a member of ISIS, hoped their wives got beheaded and thier daughters raped


£45 fine

Kind've puts it all into perspective, dunnit?

[The Mad Monk]

untakenname said:

It's the sign at the beginning of this video of the incident, just uploaded from my dashcam
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4zxWBzg8s8

Bang to rights.

Pay up.

[The Mad Monk]

Mr Snrub said:

768 said:

Blaster72 said:

rb5er said:

Getting fined for that is taking the piss. Robbing s.

That about sums it up for me. I feel for you OP.

+1

+2

Was watching one of those Police Interceptor programmes earlier. Guy was pulled over with a load of good he'd shoplifted, then told the arresting coppers he was a member of ISIS, hoped their wives got beheaded and thier daughters raped


£45 fine

-1

[4x4Tyke]

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http:/...

[Hilts]

Blaster72 said:

rb5er said:

Getting fined for that is taking the piss. Robbing s.

That about sums it up for me. I feel for you OP.

Same here.

130 bones for that. What a crock of st.

I hope they've got on masks, carrying tools and wearing strippit jerseys when they take your money.

[untakenname]

Just drafting my response to send in my lunch break, some interesting advice and views in this thread.

I've found this snippet which says
"All signs must be legible and facing the correct way which is 90 degrees to the pavement"

I can't find the exact rules where this comes from though? Does anyone have a link so I can quote the relevant code as surely the All part will vindicate me in regards to the signage being obscured?


Also found this in regards to Bromley where an appeal succeeded on the fact that although the vehicle crossed the solid white line no advantage was gained over other traffic.

http://www.bromleytransport.org.uk/Cray_Avenue_Cam...

Cheers.

[S11Steve]

It'll be somewhere in the depths of this legislation, but schedule 9 covers bus lanes signs - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedu...

[The Mad Monk]

[quote=Hilts]

I hope they've got on .... strippit jerseys.....

[quote]

I agree.

I think those strippit jerseys look good.

[Sebring440]

untakenname said:

I've found this snippet which says
"All signs must be legible and facing the correct way which is 90 degrees to the pavement"

Yup, that's definitely 90 degrees to the pavement. You've got a case!

[Red Devil]

untakenname said:

Also found this in regards to Bromley where an appeal succeeded on the fact that although the vehicle crossed the solid white line no advantage was gained over other traffic.

http://www.bromleytransport.org.uk/Cray_Avenue_Cam...

That's the same appeal I was involved with, as mentioned in my previous post.*

You need to re-read the article because you have misinterpreted it.
The 'no advantage gained' was not the fact which led to success.
It was because Roy crossed the line to facilitate a left turn into Station Approach.

You, otoh, were not about to turn into Penge Lane so that line of argument is not open to you.
If, despite that, you decide to wing it and the adjudicator exposes the lie you're stuffed.

Pinning your hopes on the hanging basket might succeed but what about the Diagram 958 sign you passed earlier?
If that was unobscured it weakens your case: de minimis works both ways.

Adjudicators are not bound by the decisions of other adjudicators, although a previous one might be persuasive.
You'll need to do some Googling to find the reference number of a similar case to yours which was successful.
Then search the Statutory Register - http://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/about/registers-...

 * That bus lane created more problems than it solved. So much so that LB Bromley removed it several years ago.
    https://goo.gl/maps/SChvgK9evu62