Bus lane ticket

[Seanrof]

Below is a you tube link of a video outlining possible mitigating circumstances of a bus lane enforcing camera installed by Lambeth Council .
If you have a spare 7 minutes, and think you could help, please view the video created by a member of the public who along with many others have been fined making this identical manoeuvre shown within this video.

After 2 failed attempts at an appeal, I have a hearing in a couple of weeks as a last chance to have the decision overturned. My comments are n the you tube link, under the same name.

Any advice I could possible use here much appreciated. Thanks for your time


Sean




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2Ruq-nHpi0&lc...

[SVTRick]

Great job and the video pal
Good luck with your appeal as this clearly shows entrapment - forget the signs on the gate they are irrelevant.
It's about time us motorists, professional drivers and companies stood up to this sort of revenue raising.

Perhaps put these cameras up to catch thugs and those involved with serious incidents like knife crime etc.
That image of your vehicle shows the camera would be clear enough to view faces using the area and even better
if it had a PTZ facility.

But know doubt the PH spineless bell ends will be along soon who want you castrated for daring to allow your vehicle to pass
over that so called Bus Lane.

[Graveworm]

Traffic authorities have to take such steps necessary to secure, before the coming into force of a TRO, the placing of traffic signs in such places so that ‘adequate information as to the effect of the order is made available to persons using the road.
That's what the hearing will hinge on. If it finds they did not then you are golden.

[jondude]

I cannot see how any reasonable or even half reasonable person would not immediately refund your fine on this.

Your video says it all and is very well made.

[vonhosen]

So the maker of the video expects there to be a broken line into a bus lane (such as that at the following junction), BUS LANE painted on the surface & signage (such as in the following road on the left) for every entrance/exit/driveway from & to a residential or commercial property?

[Alucidnation]

That is a bit sneaky.

[ElectricPics]

vonhosen said:

So the maker of the video expects there to be a broken line into a bus lane (such as that at the following junction), BUS LANE painted on the surface & signage (such as in the following road on the left) for every entrance/exit/driveway from & to a residential or commercial property?

At least some indication. In this case, there is none. Otherwise there should be no enforcement on vehicles turning out of there.

[XFDreamer]

vonhosen said:

So the maker of the video expects there to be a broken line into a bus lane (such as that at the following junction), BUS LANE painted on the surface & signage (such as in the following road on the left) for every entrance/exit/driveway from & to a residential or commercial property?

I would say that was reasonable.

If we're expected to abide by the rules then the rules must be clearly displayed surely?

[vonhosen]

ElectricPics said:

vonhosen said:

So the maker of the video expects there to be a broken line into a bus lane (such as that at the following junction), BUS LANE painted on the surface & signage (such as in the following road on the left) for every entrance/exit/driveway from & to a residential or commercial property?

At least some indication. In this case, there is none. Otherwise there should be no enforcement on vehicles turning out of there.

I don't think it's reasonable to expect signage for every single entrance/exit to residential or commercial premises (which is what you'd need to not have that situation).There is a clear Bus lane line there & there was a warning from the hotel on the gate.
It's reasonable to expect all roads entering the bus lane, but not all entrance/exits IMHO, otherwise 100 terraced houses is going to mean a ridiculous number of markings/signs etc. Also it would have all been there when he drove into the venue & crossed the bus lane.

[walm]

ElectricPics said:

At least some indication. In this case, there is none. Otherwise there should be no enforcement on vehicles turning out of there.

There is indication. It's the massive solid white line. Why do you think that's there?

Nevertheless, I totally agree that it's entrapment and very obviously a money making scheme to put the camera there.

[vonhosen]

XFDreamer said:

vonhosen said:

So the maker of the video expects there to be a broken line into a bus lane (such as that at the following junction), BUS LANE painted on the surface & signage (such as in the following road on the left) for every entrance/exit/driveway from & to a residential or commercial property?

I would say that was reasonable.

If we're expected to abide by the rules then the rules must be clearly displayed surely?

The rules don't say that there has to be signs or BUS LANE on the surface at every entrance/exit to residential or commercial properties.

What does have to be there at all points, the solid line, is.

[outnumbered]

vonhosen said:

So the maker of the video expects there to be a broken line into a bus lane (such as that at the following junction), BUS LANE painted on the surface & signage (such as in the following road on the left) for every entrance/exit/driveway from & to a residential or commercial property?

All he's really asking is that they make the bus lane a bit more obvious, and also raising some perfectly reasonable questions about the way they're enforcing, at this particular location. Both of which seem quite fair to me.

[vonhosen]

outnumbered said:

vonhosen said:

So the maker of the video expects there to be a broken line into a bus lane (such as that at the following junction), BUS LANE painted on the surface & signage (such as in the following road on the left) for every entrance/exit/driveway from & to a residential or commercial property?

All he's really asking is that they make the bus lane a bit more obvious, and also raising some perfectly reasonable questions about the way they're enforcing, at this particular location. Both of which seem quite fair to me.

Which is what the premises next door will then also say for their entrance, then the next & so on until you have signs & BUS LANE on the road every 10 yards. If you have to have it at one then you have to have at the next & the next & I don't think that's necessary. The solid line everywhere is enough along with signage at entrances from joining roads, but not from premises IMHO.

[outnumbered]

vonhosen said:

Which is what the premises next door will then also say for their entrance, then the next & so on until you have signs & BUS LANE on the road every 10 yards. If you have to have it at one then you have to have at the next & the next & I don't think that's necessary. The solid line everywhere is enough along with signage at entrances from joining roads, but not from premises IMHO.

Perhaps they should put a camera outside every premises as well, to make sure they capture ALL THE TRANSGRESSORS.

[55palfers]

Also, isn't a penalty of £130 a bit out of all proportion for the scale of the "offence"?

No-one died.

[deckster]

vonhosen said:

Which is what the premises next door will then also say for their entrance, then the next & so on until you have signs & BUS LANE on the road every 10 yards. If you have to have it at one then you have to have at the next & the next & I don't think that's necessary. The solid line everywhere is enough along with signage at entrances from joining roads, but not from premises IMHO.

That's not what anybody is saying. The point, which was articulated very reasonably and clearly in the video, is that there should be a greater allowance for inadvertent transgressions when there was very little indication that what they were doing was wrong.

If you watch the video of him turning out, it is not clear that there was in fact an offence committed and certainly that somebody unfamiliar with the area who was presumably concentrating on traffic and where they were going would in fact realise that there was a bus lane there at all.

[walm]

deckster said:

If you watch the video of him turning out, it is not clear that there was in fact an offence committed...

What are you talking about - it's 100% clear!
At 3.20 the still shot shows him just beyond the pedestrian crossing - in the bus lane well past his 20m grace.

[55palfers]

walm said:

deckster said:

If you watch the video of him turning out, it is not clear that there was in fact an offence committed...

What are you talking about - it's 100% clear!
At 3.20 the still shot shows him just beyond the pedestrian crossing - in the bus lane well past his 20m grace.

If you don't realise you're in a bus lane, why would you change lanes? Especially as you want to turn left.

[walm]

55palfers said:

walm said:

deckster said:

If you watch the video of him turning out, it is not clear that there was in fact an offence committed...

What are you talking about - it's 100% clear!
At 3.20 the still shot shows him just beyond the pedestrian crossing - in the bus lane well past his 20m grace.

If you don't realise you're in a bus lane, why would you change lanes? Especially as you want to turn left.

And what has that got to do with committing an offence?

Whether he realised it or not - he committed an offence as is shown quite clearly in the video!

Whether or not you realise you are doing it, driving at 80mph is an offence, for example.

[Ed/L152]

vonhosen said:

I don't think it's reasonable to expect signage for every single entrance/exit to residential or commercial premises

Of course it is reasonable, by colouring the lane red. Which is what used to be exactly the case in this location according to the video, if you'd watched.

walm said:

What are you talking about - it's 100% clear!
At 3.20 the still shot shows him just beyond the pedestrian crossing - in the bus lane well past his 20m grace.

Is the crossing a bus lane? If a bus lane requires a solid white line, then no.