Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

London Borough Bus Lane


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3857 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Dear Forum,

 

I have never driven to London before as I live in the countryside and have had no need to visit the 'big smoke'. On 17/11/2013 I decided to go and collect some second hand furniture from a place I had not visited before. After a 4 hour journey I had hit a busy and confusing (sometimes aggressive) traffic system. My Sat Nav which needs upgrading was politely taking me all sorts of directions which at one stage must have been a bus lane :???: because this morning I received a fine for £130.00 or £65.00 if I pay in the next 14 days, with photographic evidence. Do I really have to pay this:???::???::???:

 

Do London Borough of Hounslow care that I was confused and Sat Nav had told me to turn left at the traffic lights so I took the left lane. In the picture I can see another car behind me, were they also asked to pay a fine?

 

Please can you help. Thank you

 

P.s. It was on Chiswick High road

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there,

 

Unfortunately I don't think you have much of a Defence on this if the bus lane was in operation at the time.

 

I assume there is an "end of bus lane" sign somewhere before the junction and it may be that you crossed into the left hand lane before you were supposed to.

 

The same will apply to the other car.

 

As this was a Sunday though it might be worth double checking if the bus lane was in force. It depends what the sign says - they either give hours of operation or say "at any time".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh that happened to me once. I could have smacked the bloke in front of me. He stopped to wave pedestrians across which meant I got stuck in the junction.

 

You might be able to appeal. You could see that the road ahead was clear and your exit was blocked by the inexplicable decision of the driver in front not to move forward. I don't hold out much hope because they say shouldn't enter unless your exit is clear but if everyone drove around like that we have stop/start at every box junction with just one car going across at a time and how would that help traffic flow?

 

There is a ground for appeal if someone else stops you from exiting the junction. It didn't work for me, but it's worth a try.

 

If you are ever going along the King's Road be very careful around the junction with Wandsworth Bridge Road. The traffic lights timing there means they catch hundreds of people every month. Total moneymaker. :mad2:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh that happened to me once. I could have smacked the bloke in front. He stopped to wave pedestrians across leaving me stuck in the junction.

 

You could appeal. They'll say you shouldn't have entered the junction unless your exit was clear, but you could say you could see the road ahead was clear with room for you to cross but you were prevented from doing so by the totally inexplicable decision of the driver in front to stop when he had ample room to move forward.

 

There is a ground of appeal if you are blocked by another driver when you thought you had space to clear the junction so it's worth a try. I don't hold out much hope though.

 

If you are ever on the New Kings Road be very careful around the junction with Wandsworth Bridge Road. The timing of the traffic lights means that hundreds of people get caught in the box junction every month. Total moneymaker. :mad2:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would firstly ask them under FOA for the approval certificate of that particular camera.

Hounslow will send you a web link where there will be a camera registered as approved.

This is the trick.

Last time I got fined by a camera I contacted the relevant body issuing the certificates (don't really remember who, I think ministry of transport) and they confirmed that the only approved device in Hounslow, the one on the website pointed out to me, is their control room!

So all cameras on the road in Hounslow were issuing illegal fines at the time.

Maybe they sorted it out, but it's worth a shot.

I got my ticket cancelled and compensation for time wasted attending the adjudication.

They think they're above the law, wrong!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would firstly ask them under FOA for the approval certificate of that particular camera.

Hounslow will send you a web link where there will be a camera registered as approved.

This is the trick.

Last time I got fined by a camera I contacted the relevant body issuing the certificates (don't really remember who, I think ministry of transport) and they confirmed that the only approved device in Hounslow, the one on the website pointed out to me, is their control room!

So all cameras on the road in Hounslow were issuing illegal fines at the time.

Maybe they sorted it out, but it's worth a shot.

I got my ticket cancelled and compensation for time wasted attending the adjudication.

They think they're above the law, wrong!

 

What certification is required for bus lane cameras or moving traffic???

Link to post
Share on other sites

All CCTV, cameras or speed recording devices used to enforce traffic and parking offences must be approved.

Hounslow and many other councils do not get theirs approved because it probably costs money.

Even if the offence has clearly happened, the evidence from a non approved device are irrelevant.

Us motorists must follow the letter of the law at all times, so should the local authorities.

They are not above the law, even if they think they are.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The OP however wasn't done for speeding or parking so kindly point out what legislation you base your incorrect information on?

 


The bus lane (approved devices) order 2005 states:

Approved devices

2. A device is an approved device for the purposes of regulations under section 144 of the Transport Act 2000 (civil penalties for bus lane contraventions) if it is of a type which falls within any of the following descriptions—
(a)subject to article 2, a device which is of a description specified in an order made by the Secretary of State under section 20(9) of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988(1) (prescribed devices for the purposes of speeding and other offences); .
(b)a device certified, by a person authorised in that behalf by the Secretary of State, as meeting the criteria specified in paragraphs 2 to 6 of the Schedule to this Order; .
©a device that does not meet the criteria referred to in paragraph (b) but which was used before the coming into force of this Order for the purpose of bus lane enforcement under Part II (bus lanes) of the London Local Authorities Act 1996.

That's how I got my pcn cancelled.
If you don't want people to help the op, just say so and let Hounslow get richer.
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The bus lane (approved devices) order 2005 states:

 

Approved devices

 

2. A device is an approved device for the purposes of regulations under section 144 of the Transport Act 2000 (civil penalties for bus lane contraventions) if it is of a type which falls within any of the following descriptions—

(a)subject to article 2, a device which is of a description specified in an order made by the Secretary of State under section 20(9) of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988(1) (prescribed devices for the purposes of speeding and other offences); .

(b)a device certified, by a person authorised in that behalf by the Secretary of State, as meeting the criteria specified in paragraphs 2 to 6 of the Schedule to this Order; .

©a device that does not meet the criteria referred to in paragraph (b) but which was used before the coming into force of this Order for the purpose of bus lane enforcement under Part II (bus lanes) of the London Local Authorities Act 1996.

 

That's how I got my pcn cancelled.

If you don't want people to help the op, just say so and let Hounslow get richer.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but the title of this thread is 'London Bus lane' and therefor the correct legislation is the London Local Authorities act 1996. The 1996 Act requires that the equipment be a prescribed device, described in the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 (as amended) as:

 

"a camera designed or adapted to record the presence of a vehicle on an area of road which is a bus lane or route for use by buses only" as such no certification is required.

 

Helping people is one thing, quoting totally irrelevant legislation and in the process giving duff advice is another.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct me if I'm wrong but the title of this thread is 'London Bus lane' and therefor the correct legislation is the London Local Authorities act 1996. The 1996 Act requires that the equipment be a prescribed device, described in the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 (as amended) as:

 


"a camera designed or adapted to record the presence of a vehicle on an area of road which is a bus lane or route for use by buses only" as such no certification is required.


 


Helping people is one thing, quoting totally irrelevant legislation and in the process giving duff advice is another.


 


Pardon me for trying to help.
I got my ticket cancelled quoting that legislation.
I will try to avoid giving advice in future, even though I thought this was the point of this forum.
Excuse me again
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please do give advice in future if you feel you may be able to help.

 

I've given advice on the forum which often goes against that given by others with more experience/knowledge and in some cases I have been shouted down. Several people I have supported in their appeals against traffic violations have been told by others there is no hope but the appeals have been won.

 

When my advice has proved to be correct and I've helped someone to achieve a successful result it is always very silent. :-)

 

DDxx

Link to post
Share on other sites

As with DD, I say don't be disinclined to contribute because of another posters style.

 

Over time we learn to appreciate the depth of knowledge of certain posters in specific areas - and their tolerance of others. But there is always the possibility of error as much as misinterpretation.

 

Be grateful for all contributors who have build up a track record which can be measured in number of posts and green 'stars' (Oops - that means ignore this!!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

All CCTV, cameras or speed recording devices used to enforce traffic and parking offences must be approved.

 

The statement above is incorrect and could if used in an appeal cost someone time and money, if you think being corrected is somehow rude that is not really my problem. Everyone makes mistakes, you can either learn from them or go off and sulk and refuse to help anyone again, thats your choice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...