I thought there had to be 2 signs, 1 with "No right turn ahead", and then another on the traffic light with the no right turn symbol? I find it bizarre that there is no guidance nor certification for this yet it can be used to issue PCNs.

Because they are, that's the law. Maybe you could have a camera inside your house to check you obey the rules all the time Hang on, I just saw you use your hose pipe, that'll be £50 please.

It's the same thing. CCTV must be indicated clearly regardless of what it's used for. It cannot also be implemented solely to catch road contraventions, there must be other reasons. I would like to check if the CCTV is certified as well but not sure how to. Alternatively, what is the minimum amount of signage required for no right turns at junctions?

Clause 8.79 states “ the primary objective of any camera enforcement system is to ensure the safe and efficient operation of the road network by deterring motorists from breaking road traffic restrictions and detecting those that do. To do this , the system needs to be well publicised and indicated with lawful traffic signs”. Signs should: be clearly visible and readable; contain details of the organisation operating the system, the purpose for using CCTV and who to contact about the scheme (where these things are not obvious to those being monitored); and be an appropriate size depending on context, for example, whether they are viewed by pedestrians or car drivers."

So, Lambeth council again! I received a PCN with an "alleged" contravention. 50R Performing a prohibited right turn (no right turn) I looked at the CCTV footage and pictures and it's footage of a camera or CCTV operator who simply just points the camera at every car at the lights and zooms in and out quickly to catch the licence plate. PCN here: 4 images: http://imageshack.us/g/545/pcn1edit.jpg/ The actual contravention occurred as I looked at the council website where you can see the footage and the CCTV operator zooms in on the traffic light after that has a no right turn sign. My question was more around whether signage is needed for the CCTV camera use of this? The CCTV camera is installed on the street but I've never seen any mention of it. For example, with speed cameras, I believe the law requires a sign that states Police Enforcement cameras in use? I can't believe a CCTV camera has been solely installed just for this use tbh to catch out motorists. An example here states that government guidance says signage needs to be used and there might even be grounds for appeal based on the use of CCTV at all: http://www.penaltychargenotice.co.uk/cctv-enforcement/ "the goal of enforcement should be "100% compliance without penalty". This means they should be a well-marked and parked conspicuously to discourage offences and not deployed in a manner which will maximise revenue by allowing offences to occur." Doesn't aiming a CCTV camera at a junction zooming in and out quickly on every car to catch the licence plate count as revenue enhancing?

On a philosophical note, it is ironic that the banks charging you for the service of loans are actually lending out money created electronically that they don't have something a lot of people don't consider. It is one of the best legal scams I have ever heard of This is a US example but the same applies for UK banks... http://moneyterms.co.uk/reserve-requirement/ Anyway, thanks for feedback.

Something must be wrong in the credit file system though if it's supposed to be clean after 6 years yet old debts/CCJs are showing up?

I'm just saying that a lot of people do it and then skip the country. I didn't state anything above I have no need for aloan anyway, it was an interesting argument I was discussing yesterday.

CRA? You mean if you move address, the bailiffs will just follow you about based on your council tax location? ...I presume they couldn't track you through your credit file because they would have to run checks on you, which they cannot do without permission. I assume some people do this...then leave the country.

Yeah but if you've not paid back your 15k loan (like many) then you might not need further credit

Aha, so it is the CCJ they can claim against? Presumably you do not have to let the bailiffs in the property though for 6 years and then you're ok? ...or change address where they can't find you? Also, I don't know many companies that credit check you therefore if you had a CCJ, they wouldn't know about it.

The court order is most likely a CCJ though isn;t just requiring you to pay back the money over time from your pay check. Now, if you have moved address how are you to know you have a CCJ against you? Still, at that point that the payment plan is set up, what's to stop you defaulting on that? The bailiffs still have no right to your stuff because the loan wasn't secured on anything? I don't have the above situation...just think it is interesting from a legal standpoint.

I am just talking hypothetically. Say you took out a 10k loan and simply never paid any installments. What would happen? It's a consumer loan therefore it's not secured on anything, you can't get any magistrates fines either therefore a bailiff cannot be called to collect anything from you.

If a consumer loan is taken out and NOT secured on anything then presumably the bailffs cannot do anything?

What was your loan secured on or is it a consumer loan?

What are the magistrates court fines for? Anything related to tax or council tax? As far as I was aware bailiffs could only claim your assets for those reasons...any other reasons and they have no entitlement to your money as the loans you took were not secured on your assets.

Are credit files wiped clean after 6 years? I believe I may have an outstanding debt with a mobile phone company but haven't received any letters from them and I have moved address, I haven't checked my credit file either. If debt is wiped after 6 years, then isn't it possible to just take a loan and never pay it back?

That's classic. Foiled by the kids

It's the same tactics that debt collection companies use I suppose. They must visit some properties from time to time but you don't have to let them in. The annoying thing would be if someone came round, you told them to go away and they kept knocking on your door.

Did I say guns...I meant goons. Actually, on a side point, are they allowed to track signals coming out of people's houses? Kind of like eavesdropping. I have a theory...I had one of these when I was a kid...a kind of satellite shaped dish that could amplify the sound from a 10s to 100s yards away. I bet it's one of those plastic things from Hamley's that they use...

So they spend thousands on some van to catch a few people The enforcement officers or hired guns must cost more than the actual licence -

So, the old age adage of TV licensing comes round We have a TV - we do not use it for receicing broadcasts because we use iplayer, skyplayer, etc. Before anyone says otherwise, this is legal. If you don't receive broadcasts and do not have an aerial then you don't have to pay. Online players are not live TV. Now we are receiving letters about "enforcers" coming round. I doubt they'd bother sending anyone round and they don't have to be let in anyway but does anyone actually bother? I don't want to have to deal with some hardnut at the door pestering me in my own time. Why do they bother sending the letters, noone ever calls and these vans don't actually exist. How can a van detect a TV in a flat anyway, they can't pinpoint whose TV belongs to which flat. Will my laptop monitor show up as TV equipment?

Most stores have a returns policy stating 28 days as long as the goods are not damaged. However, they also now produce goods in vacuum sealed packaging such that in order to open the packaging, you have to tally destroy it with scissors. Is this legal? Shouldn't you still be entitled to return it under Sales of Goods Law?