Legal advice re ULEZ 2

RomfordNavy

Looking for a bit of legal advice:

For those who live in boroughs that have not signed TFL's Section 8 agreement, TFL's Signs, Posts, many new Cameras and other Street Furniture have all been installed without Planning Permission and therefore Unlawfully.  That being the case is it perfectly lawful to remove them?

Whether this is done by the local Council or, failing that if they won't remove them, someone else, ie the people of that borough. I am talking about just removing them not stealing them.

Are there any Solicitors on here that could confirm my understanding of this situation please.

Car_54

IANAL, but ... if something is built or erected without planning consent, the council can order its removal or demolition. That does not mean that some vigilante can do so.

katejo

RomfordNavy said:

Looking for a bit of legal advice:

For those who live in boroughs that have not signed TFL's Section 8 agreement, TFL's Signs, Posts, many new Cameras and other Street Furniture have all been installed without Planning Permission and therefore Unlawfully.  That being the case is it perfectly lawful to remove them?

Whether this is done by the local Council or, failing that if they won't remove them, someone else, ie the people of that borough. I am talking about just removing them not stealing them.

Are there any Solicitors on here that could confirm my understanding of this situation please.

I don't know the answer but I have seen a clip of someone ripping one down and dumping it by the road this week. Someone I know posted  the clip on their FB page. No idea who had actually done it or where it was.  

TooManyPoints

The fact that something has been erected without planning consent does not make it fair game for removal by anybody who doesn't like the look of it. In short, you can't do it. It is not up to individuals to enforce planning law. It is a local authority responsibility and there is a procedure to be followed for enforcement.

Car_54

katejo said:

RomfordNavy said:

Looking for a bit of legal advice:

For those who live in boroughs that have not signed TFL's Section 8 agreement, TFL's Signs, Posts, many new Cameras and other Street Furniture have all been installed without Planning Permission and therefore Unlawfully.  That being the case is it perfectly lawful to remove them?

Whether this is done by the local Council or, failing that if they won't remove them, someone else, ie the people of that borough. I am talking about just removing them not stealing them.

Are there any Solicitors on here that could confirm my understanding of this situation please.

I don't know the answer but I have seen a clip of someone ripping one down and dumping it by the road this week. Someone I know posted  the clip on their FB page. No idea who had actually done it or where it was.  

So, he commits criminal damage, and then posts the evidence online.

Maybe not the smartest example to follow.

400ixl

You don't need a solicitor to know that Joe Public removing the cameras would not end well.

Didn't it also go to court that TFL did not actually need the local planning permission either so they can't take them down.

MX5huggy

Why do you think they need planning permission, my local planing portal is not full of applications for every road sign CCTV camera and bollard. 

user1977

RomfordNavy said:

Whether this is done by the local Council or, failing that if they won't remove them, someone else, ie the people of that borough. I am talking about just removing them not stealing them.

Are there any Solicitors on here that could confirm my understanding of this situation please.

Can you advise from where you've gained your "understanding", please? Does it involve shouting something about Magna Carta while you do it?

RomfordNavy

400ixl said:

You don't need a solicitor to know that Joe Public removing the cameras would not end well.

Didn't it also go to court that TFL did not actually need the local planning permission either so they can't take them down.

Well I understand that Hillingdon Council are removing them so I assume they did need planning permission, what else is the Section 8 agreement for?

WellKnownSid

RomfordNavy said:

Well I understand that Hillingdon Council are removing them so I assume they did need planning permission, what else is the Section 8 agreement for?

I think they (Hillingdon) were p*ssed that TFL and the Mayor of London were going ahead with installing cameras and signs because it made them (Hillingdon council) look stupid and incompetent.

So they then spent a ton of taxpayers' money on fighting the Mayor in the courts and lost, making them look stupid and incompetent.

Sorry, what was the question again?

"Is it legal for you and your mates - after a few pints down the dog and ostrich - to shimmy up the nearest pole and remove £20,000 of sensitive electronic equipment installed on behalf of the Mayor of London because your local council say they still don't agree with it in principle but otherwise have no legal basis with which to object"?

I think, deep down, you know the answer to that one!

400ixl

RomfordNavy said:

400ixl said:

You don't need a solicitor to know that Joe Public removing the cameras would not end well.

Didn't it also go to court that TFL did not actually need the local planning permission either so they can't take them down.

Well I understand that Hillingdon Council are removing them so I assume they did need planning permission, what else is the Section 8 agreement for?

In their view, but the government's view is the opposite. Therefore your very premise of it being unlawful to have put them up is on shaky ground, especially as the councils lost their first court cases.

Removing the signs is not going to stop the ULEZ zone from applying, it is just the poor motorist who now doesn't know they are entering the zone who has the problem. They will still get charged if they pass any ANPR camera enforcing the scheme but will have had no signage warning them of such.