Jump to content

Showing results for tags 'bridge'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • The Consumer Forums: The Mall
    • Welcome to the Consumer Forums
    • FAQs
    • Forum Rules - Please read before posting
    • Consumer Forums website - Post Your Questions & Suggestions about this site
    • Helpful Organisations
    • The Bear Garden – for off-topic chat
  • CAG Community centre
    • CAG Community Centre Subforums:-
  • Consumer TV/Radio Listings
    • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
  • CAG Library - Please register
    • CAG library Subforums
  • Banks, Loans & Credit
    • Bank and Finance Subforums:
    • Other Institutions
  • Retail and Non-retail Goods and Services
    • Non-Retail subforums
    • Retail Subforums
  • Work, Social and Community
    • Work, Social and Community Subforums:
  • Debt problems - including homes/ mortgages, PayDay Loans
    • Debt subforums:
    • PayDay loan and other Short Term Loans subforum:
  • Motoring
    • Motoring subforums
  • Legal Forums
    • Legal Issues subforums


  • News from the National Consumer Service
  • News from the Web


  • A Say in the Life of .....
  • Debt Diaries

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start




Found 9 results

  1. Whilst parking for my case against WY Parking (which I won), I return to my car with a PCN attached (FML) I paid (confirmed money has left my bank account also) using my debit card - The ticket machine gave 2 tickets (both saying DISPLAY THIS WAY UP ON DASHBOARD). I took the ticket showing my parking fee more clearly to claim for costs.. Still displayed the counterpart though. I am still within my appeal timescale: Just want to confirm what I should write where it says "Why do you think you should not have been given a ticket" Tickets.pdf PCN.pdf Manchester Council Pictures.pdf
  2. Final resting place of a Yorkshire born WW2 soldier killed in the 'Bridge too far' Battle of Arnhem is finally marked after almost 73 years READ MORE HERE: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/final-resting-place-of-a-yorkshire-born-ww2-soldier-killed-in-the-bridge-too-far-battle-of-arnhem-is-finally-marked-after-almost-73-years
  3. Afternoon, Can anyone please help, i was driving home last night and crossed a swing bridge on Chester Road Warrington, when i crossed the joint between the bridge and the main carriageway i felt a crack from under my car. i inspected the car and found both coil springs have snapped at the same time. I have looked into the joint on the bridge and found they are not level and in fact found the bridge road 22mm lower than the main carriageway, i have reported the issue to the council who have replying stating its not there bridge and pasted me to Peel Ports, i have reported the issue to them as well. I have had my car inspected by my local garage and they have confirmed both from coil springs have snapped and need replacing, the cost of the work will be £180.00, my question is can i claim off Peel Ports ?
  4. Thank you to all at bridgehouse mansfield who today helped with the passing of a loved one got us in without an appointment had someone with him constantly put him on oxygen to help him breathe Thank you for how kind all your staff were simba/aslan ???? - adopted 2005 - feb 2016
  5. Hi Firstly a big thanks to this forum and the people here for their tips! Recently had a bus lane PCN cancelled by Lambeth Council. Hopefully anyone in a similar situation can benefit from the resources and information below. Judging by the c.£172k (!!!) in average annual income from this single location. This is very nearly almost resembles a racketeering operation by Lambeth Council. No doubt there are some legitimate contraventions, however the nature of this particular area would suggest some motorists are caught out due to failings on the behalf of Lambeth Council to follow Traffic Sign Regulations. Situation On driving southbound on Westminster Bridge Road towards Lambeth North station, unwittingly ended up in a bus lane as road markings and signage was incorrect and/or insufficient (see images). Received a letter a few weeks later with an initial £65 fine if paid in 14 days, or £130 thereafter. Scoured this forum and a few others for some advice as I'm usually quite vigilant with bus lane operating times and didn't recall seeing one. Found some good advice as to how a Bus Lane, and indeed other road systems, should be set-up in ‘The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002’. Went back in person and walked the area, took a few pictures of everything. In particular, the very poor lighting, and blocking (ironically) by parked buses of the first sign; lack of distance between 1st & 2nd signs; potentially unsafe conflict area with pedestrian crossing markings; twisted signs and short road markings and so on. I did this not to be pedantic. One would imagine roads systems are designed to allow road users to travel as safely as possible, giving consistent and recognisable warning of any changes in the road ahead. Our appointed officials must play by the rules if they expect us to, and be held accountable when they do not. Having gathered some evidence I drafted the following letter as an informal appeal: Dear Sir/Madam I am writing to informally challenge the issuing of the above PCN on the following grounds: The bus lane in question is non-compliant with the ‘The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002’ deeming the PCN unenforceable. The restrictions were not correctly signed and the road markings were incorrect. 1. The sign to diagram 958 is not located 30 metres in advance of the lane taper. As shown in the attached image, a sign is only located at the start of the taper. (Fig. 1 – taken 07/11/2014) 2. The sign to diagram 958 is not clearly visible. As shown in the attached image, the sign has been rotated to a position near-parallel to the flow of traffic. Rendering it not possible to safely view from the usual left lane driving position. (Fig. 2 – taken 07/11/2014) 3. The taper to indicate the start of the lane is not the required length or ratio of 1:10. (Fig. 3 – taken 07/11/2014) 4. The deflection arrows to diagram 1014 are not positioned correctly and are not the correct length. There are no deflection arrows upstream of the start of the taper as required. The position the arrows should be, would actually conflict with pedestrian crossing road signs. (Fig.4 – extract from Google Maps on 07/11/2014) 5. The pictures of the alleged contravention supplied on the PCN do not conform to ‘The Bus Lane Enforcement Camera Handbook’ published by the Home Office. Failure to show the correct information in the correct order must prove that the images are not admissible and render them void therefore there is no evidence that any contravention occurred. Therefore the instrument used does not appear to be an approved device. 6. Further, on inspection of the footage provided: a. No buses were hindered in their progress – alleged contravention would be de minimis b. There is no gain in position on another vehicle – alleged contravention would be de minimis c. Any attempt to rectify my driving position would have necessitated a rapid lane change to the adjacent right hand lane before another rapid lane change to the left, in order to turn left at the traffic lights ahead to continue my journey. Actions which I would deem confusing and hazardous to other road users, particularly cyclists. Should these representations be rejected then please treat this as a request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 for the following documents: a. A copy of the bus lane order or regulation giving effect to the Bus Lane. b. A copy of the Safety Audit for this road layout. c. A copy of the engineer’s scale diagrams showing the layout of this Bus Lane, the road markings and the signage (including warnings of camera enforcement). d. Copies of any approvals of deviations of signage from The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions. e. Logs of maintenance visits verifying existence and condition of the signs. f. Certification of type approval of the CCTV device. g. Details of the number of times that the videotape used has been degaussed and reused. h. A copy of the Camera Enforcement logbook recording the alleged contravention. i. Copies of the still images showing all the required information in the correct order. j. The number of PCNs issued by London Borough of Lambeth in respect of this location. k. The number of PCNs issued by London Borough of Lambeth in respect of this location and cancelled by them following informal challenges. l. The number of PCNs issued by London Borough of Lambeth in respect of this location and cancelled by them following formal appeal to them. m. The number of PCNs issued by London Borough of Lambeth in respect of this location and cancelled following appeal to a PATAS adjudicator. n. The number of PCNs issued by London Borough of Lambeth in respect of this location and not pursued by them for any other reason. o. The average monthly penalty revenue raised by London Borough of Lambeth in respect of this location. I ask that you acknowledge this challenge at your earliest convenience and respond with your reply. Yours sincerely, XXX The informal appeal was rejected, to little surprise. Being quite adamant this bus lane was incorrect, I was quite willing to take this the full 12 rounds of appeals PTAS etc. For the formal appeal I sent the same letter, less the FOI requests. After several months of waiting the PCN was then cancelled! I do hope the above is of some use to anyone in a similar situation! Link 1: google maps (retrace your steps!) Link 2: pepipoo.com/lofiversion/index.php/t81781.html Link 3: consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?290879-Bus-Lane-PCN/page11 Link 4: davidmarq.com/uploaderv6_1/files/7/PATAS.pdf Link 5: forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=92678&pid=992720&mode=threaded&start=#entry992720 Link 6: londonbikers.com/forums/840159/Bus-Lane-Fine,-but-I-think-I-can-get-away-with-it?PageIndex=3 TL;DR Drove in a bus lane as road markings and signage were incorrect. Informal appeal failed, formal appeal successful. £130 saved!
  6. Network Rails has said it will review it’s plans during development of the Thameslink programme at London Bridge after a short closure last night caused “Life Threatening Chaos” for rush hour commuters. Lines were shut down for 45 minutes from 4.20pm because of a person on the tracks at Streatham, the operator said. The knock-on delays saw huge numbers of people stranded on platforms and some forced to jump closed barriers to avoid the crush, while onlookers posted dramatic images online. The London Mayor, Boris Johnson said: “This chaos must end now. The scenes at London Bridge last night were completely unacceptable.“ It is a disgrace that Network Rail and the train operating companies have failed once again to get a grip of the situation at London Bridge. Mick Cash, leader of the Rail, Maritime and Transport union said last night’s scenes were ‘horrific’, adding: “RMT is sick and tired of the excuses about the continuing chaos at London Bridge which led to horrific scenes at the station last night. I wonder if those that jumped the barrier are being prosecuted.
  7. Hi, I stumbled across this forum whilst researching ways to appeal the PCN I have just been served with. As I understand, the Lendal Bridge bus lane fiasco is quite controversial (google brings up many irate articles). I lived in York last year for a few months and throughout that time, the bridge was open to all vehicles. On 9/9/13 however I was flat hunting in York as I'm planning to move back there and drove over the bridge unaware that it is now a restricted route for buses/taxis only between 1030 and 1700. The signs are poor - from the direction I took, I did not notice any new signage and my research showed that there in fact are NO new signs (apparently to avoid planning applications) and the sign that was in place is small and on the pavement next to a bus stop. I've found a photo that shows a double decker stopped at this bus stop would shadow the sign completely from drivers. In addition I did not notice any new relevant road markings. Whilst on this forum I also found something to do with the wording of the PCN - use of 'will' as opposed to 'may' in the following sentence: 'This Notice will be taken to have been served on the second working day after the day of posting (as shown on the right) unless you can show that it was not'. Have I a case to appeal?? Any advice welcome!! Nicola
  8. Has anybody successfully challenged the temporary PCN over Lendal Bridge? Have just requested Freedom of Information of exact nos. of PCN's issued both to visitors and to residents since 27.8.13, the no. of PCNs issued more than once to same person in a day and the no. of appeals. Copy of letter to York CC and York Tourist Board below. Have already received apology from the York Tourist Board by return! £60 Day Visitor Tourist Levy Like thousands of others, it would appear, I have been caught out by the temporary bus lane restriction on Lendal Bridge, York which started on 27.8.13. Never did I imagine that a pleasurable day out visiting York with 5 members of my family, some elderly, would levy the harsh YORK VISITOR TOURIST LEVY of £60 – and the threat of £90 if I dare to appeal and then lose. So little chance of the majority of people appealing the PCN when they will have to fork out even more funds to this unscrupulous Labour Council. I am not a criminal; I pay my Road Tax and Insurance on time; I abide by the rules of the road in this country. Never did I imagine that taking my family for a meal in the city and spending money to support the local economy would result in a foul taste in my mouth after receiving a PNC, And what’s really funny, is that I am not the only one. What a great [problem] for the Labour Council to attract funds to the city, in lieu of creating a real workable solution of the congestion issues there. I am sure that the 12,000+ – several of whom have ranted about the injustice of this temporary measure on the internet, several of them visitors to York who knew nothing of this local fiasco, are as equally p* off. For your information: 1 I have never driven in York before. 2 I followed my SATNAV to a Public Car Park which took me this way – through a bus lane. 3 I followed other cars on to the bridge. 4 I followed a Car Park Sign to what was previously a Council Owned Car Park at ‘Esplanade’ which clearly the Council had not bothered to re-route. 5 The signs were ambiguous (as is pointed out on many an internet review of the bridge). The Council can not even be bothered to get planning permission for effective signs. 6 The road was too congested - yes, even with these bus lane measures in place - that the sign was not obvious. 7 There were too many road signs to digest at the same time. 8 Once directed towards Lendal Bridge, there was no alternative but to follow the road through – no easy way to turn or manoeuvre to move away from this restriction without earlier warning. So my plan to return to York in December for Christmas Shopping? Well, what a dilemma I have! Why on earth would anyone choose to go to this city again – to be ripped off and threatened. Bad enough that the York residents are also being hit badly by this stupid decision of their elected Council. Never mind, plenty of other places of quality in this country to visit which do not victimise its visitors.
  9. Today I received an invoice from the company that operates the Severn Bridge. My vehicle, which I was not driving at the time, used the wrong lane paying £6.20 instead of £12.40. The "invoice" is for £119.20, less £80 "debt recovery fee" if paid within 7 days. The "invoice" is made up of: Outstanding toll £6.20 DVLA Search fee £3.00 Admin Fee £30.00 Debt Recovery Fee £80.00 The company backs this up with reference to Section 14 of the Severn Bridges Act 1992. Again, I was not the driver, but I know who was. Any advice/help gratefully received. Section 14: 14 Payment regulations and offences. (1)The Secretary of State may by regulations— (a)designate places within the toll plaza areas at which tolls (other than tolls with respect to which a pre-payment has been made) are to be paid, (b)make provision as to the persons by whom, and the manner in which, such tolls are to be paid, ©make provision for securing that vehicles in respect of which tolls are leviable do not use either of the bridges without payment of the tolls, and (d)make provision for preventing a vehicle which, having used one of the bridges, has arrived at the place at which a toll is payable in respect of it from proceeding beyond that place without the toll having been paid. (2)Regulations made under this section shall provide for a notice, specifying— (a)the categories of vehicles in respect of which tolls are leviable, (b)the amount of the tolls in respect of each category, and ©other provisions in accordance with which tolls are leviable,to be displayed at each place designated in accordance with subsection (1)(a) above. (3)Regulations under this section may include provisions modifying the general provisions of the regulations in the case of vehicles in relation to which a pre-payment of tolls has been made. (4)A person who without reasonable excuse— (a)refuses or fails to pay a toll for which he is liable, or (b)attempts to evade payment of such a toll,shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale. (5)A person who contravenes or fails to comply with a provision of regulations under this section shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.
  • Create New...