Help to stop a money making scheme

Richerme

This is about a TFL fine for turning into a road from the wrong direction.

We drive a company car and received a traffic fine for turning from Battersea Park Rd into Stanmer St from the wrong direction (turning left was prohibited). The driver took personal responsibility and asked them to waive the fine for the following reasons:
Firstly, the signage is confusing: we passed two no-entry streets until we saw a big sign allowing traffic to turn left and carry on straight placed just before Stanmer street. The actual sign we overlooked is behind this big sign (visible but easily overlooked).
Secondly, the driver was never in this area before and visits London only once or twice a year. We live in the countryside about 100 miles from London. He had been pre-occupied watching the busy traffic on this major road while trying to find a house number. He noticed the big sign and thought it allowed him to turn left. Because of other demands on his attention, he did not double-check and therefore missed the no-left-turn sign.
He also pointed out that this is his first fine.

This request was turned down with a standard letter. We are thinking of appealing.

They mounted a camera which provided us with photographic evidence of our contravention. We were also told by a local business man that a traffic officer is stationed on this corner when the camera does not work. We can pay the £60 but believe that this is a trap many get caught in and a provides the TFL with a tidy income. We really feel that someone needs to speak up in order to end this money-making scheme.

We would appreciate any support and advice for how to appeal, what research is necessary, etc. Also, did you have a similar experience and appealed?

We are grateful for any support we can get!

Unstoppable_2

Whay grounds are you going to appeal on? The fact that the driver can't drive?

The signs saying no left turn were there so you can't appeal on the grounds it isn't signed.
The fact the driver is not from the area is completely and utterly irrelevent.
The fact the driver was looking for a house number instead of concentrating on driving counts against you.
The fact the driver is completely incapable of understanding a big sign counts against you.

There are no grounds to appeal on. The fact the driver wasn't from the area and not used to busy traffic is completely and utterly irrelevent.

It is not a money making scheme. It is a clearly signed no turn which is abused by a lot of people to the extent that enforcement had to be taken.

Neil_B

Helps to show ALL of the PCN. TFL MTC ones are largely compliant but i think there's maybe a couple of points to use as leverage.

If you have some issue with signage then you would really have to show pics to get an opinion. Apart from visibility they also have to be compliant - and of course the correct sign!
Difficult if you are some distance away.
-

Richerme

Hi Neil,
Thank you so much for responding so quickly. I agree that you would have to see pics, and I will try to upload them. However, I have checked the grounds of appeal that the Adjudicator will allow. The first four (for moving traffic) do not apply. The only one I would possibly use is "the penalty exceeded the amount applicable of the case". I seriously doubt that non-compliance with traffic sign requirements fall under this - or does it?
There are several reasons for challenging their fine but I don't think the adjudicator will allow this. So what other options to you have to dry up this money making scheme?

The wording in the traffic sign manual is " It is essential that drivers have an unobstructed view of traffic signs. The distance which should be kept clear of obstructions to the sight line, whether caused by vegetation, other signs or street furniture, is known as the clear visibility distance." Also, " Generally, therefore, not more than two signs should be erected on any one post when intended to be read from an approaching vehicle. This also applies to signs mounted at the same location on separate posts." There were at least three signs in that locations. The sign indicating no left turn was not in the lane we turned into (shown on the pics we were sent).

Is there anyone who could tell me whether appealing on the grounds of a traffic sign's non-compliance with traffic sign requirements would be allowed?

Further: our PCN has the following on the letter-head: "Road Traffic Act 1991 (as amended). Is this correct?

Thanks again!

Neil_B

Good that you've done some research.

For MTC RTA 1991 is correct and it also says LLA &TFL Act 2003 0r LLA Acts 1990-2003 doesn't it.

Yes appeals are won on non-compliance of signs but you need good accurate info.

The TSM is not exactly Statute but does refer mostly to Statutory provisions hence is useful and oft referred to at Adjudications with some success. Statutory provision is the Traffic Signs General Regulations and Directions 2002 - available via 'opsi' site or DfT site. Difficult to use before you know the right diagram number to be able to find it!

MTCs are generally less sucessful for appellants at Adjudication than parking. For MTCs roughly 50/50.

As your case will turn out to be fairly complex and you need good signage advice I'm going to risk the wrath of boardguide and moderators and refer you elsewhere.
hey wendy and crabman - i've helped quite a bit lately so forgive me this one!

Try 'PePiPoo' forums and post your case in 'Parking and decrim--'.

Neil_B

You have further reponses and an offer of possibly getting the pics for you!