47 Stopped on a restricted bus stop or stand

notjamieoliver

I don't have a picture, but i've just been out and the sign is attached to a wooden telephone pole and reads No Stopping 7 am - 11 pm except buses

I measured the letters and they are 25mm.

The bus stop sign (the one with the bus numbers) is on the same pole, further up

Tilt

notjamieoliver wrote: »

I don't have a picture, but i've just been out and the sign is attached to a wooden telephone pole and reads No Stopping 7 am - 11 pm except buses

I measured the letters and they are 25mm.

The bus stop sign (the one with the bus numbers) is on the same pole, further up

Is it like the one Spacey has posted!?

notjamieoliver

It is the same as 974 on this list http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/3113/schedule/5/made

spacey2012

Tilt wrote: »

No. There is no requirement for an observation period. It isn't a 'no waiting' contravention. Once you stop on the thick yellow line and open your door, you are deemed to have stopped.

There is a requirement for the FPN to be filled in correctly.
All details entered must be accurate and correct.
If all 3 times are the same, it is not possible to observe and issue the fpn Within one minute.
If the CEO observed the vehicle before issuing the FPN then the observed time must be filled in accurately. The fact that the offence of Stopping does not require observation does not mean the FPN can be filled in with anything they feel like.
The times are requested by the FPN machine , they must be accurate.
The first time should be when the CEO attention is drawn to the offence and the second the time the FPN was issued, they have to record tax disc details, enter the offence code, registration and print the ticket.
This has all been done miraculously within the start and end of one minute ?
If the Adjudicate agrees is another point, they have started to please themselves of late, but I would argue that to not correctly issued as record the details on the FPN is a procedural impropriety.
I dont know if this has been tried, but all defences were new once.

notjamieoliver

It's a risk isn't it. It's so tempting to back down and pay it, but at the same time for the sake of two of my car wheels spending a couple of minutes on a bus stop that ceased to be in use over an hour before the 'violation' I really want to fight it. Don't get me wrong, I'm well aware that a rule is a rule and technically I broke it, but I just think it's not right at all when as far as I can see I was not causing any obstruction whatsoever

Tilt

spacey2012 wrote: »

There is a requirement for the FPN to be filled in correctly.
All details entered must be accurate and correct.
If all 3 times are the same, it is not possible to observe and issue the fpn Within one minute.
If the CEO observed the vehicle before issuing the FPN then the observed time must be filled in accurately. The fact that the offence of Stopping does not require observation does not mean the FPN can be filled in with anything they feel like.
The times are requested by the FPN machine , they must be accurate.
The first time should be when the CEO attention is drawn to the offence and the second the time the FPN was issued, they have to record tax disc details, enter the offence code, registration and print the ticket.
This has all been done miraculously within the start and end of one minute ?
If the Adjudicate agrees is another point, they have started to please themselves of late, but I would argue that to not correctly issued as record the details on the FPN is a procedural impropriety.
I dont know if this has been tried, but all defences were new once.

For a start, CEOs don't issue FPNs. Secondly the CEO will have entered the observation time as zero as the contravention dosn't require an observation time so even if he had taken an hour to issue the PCN, the observation time would still remain the same.

Personally I wouldn't cloud the issue further as you are giving the OP a glimmer of hope that the adjudicator may uphold his appeal on a technicality which is very risky as he may lose his discount. As you correctly pointed out earlier, his only hope (IMHO) is that there is something wrong with the signage but unfortunately we only have the OPs info about that issue. It maybe the case that the sign could even be in the wrong position!

Tilt

notjamieoliver wrote: »

It's a risk isn't it. It's so tempting to back down and pay it, but at the same time for the sake of two of my car wheels spending a couple of minutes on a bus stop that ceased to be in use over an hour before the 'violation' I really want to fight it. Don't get me wrong, I'm well aware that a rule is a rule and technically I broke it, but I just think it's not right at all when as far as I can see I was not causing any obstruction whatsoever

If the bus stop is near your home, you maybe inclined to contact the bus company and point this out. They may get the LA to adjust the restriction accordingly.

Obviously it's up to you if you want to take this all the way. But unless there is something wrong with the signage or markings, I personally wouldn't.

notjamieoliver

Here is a screenshot from Google images of the bus stop http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/9893/mapstx.jpg

notjamieoliver

Oops sorry TILT just saw your reply. Thanks for the advice

Tilt

notjamieoliver wrote: »

Here is a screenshot from Google images of the bus stop http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/9893/mapstx.jpg

The sign needs to be positioned in the centre of the bay (if it's a single vehicle length). Unfortunately your link dosn't show the ground!