Queens Road Bus Lane Fine

[Davey616 10]

What do you mean "again"? I'm not aware that any issues at these locations involved the TRO's.

 

Not TRO's just people having difficulty with the very large signs and road markings that they just could not see:confused:

[Zilly 10]

Buy and motorbike - driving/riding in a bus lane not a problem then!

 

Mine's for sale ... LOL ....

[Ronald 10]

The Council sent me a copy of the TRO relating to Queens Road and it appears the Order was made under Section 9 - Experimental traffic schemes - of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. The Order came into force on 16th December 1998. Sub section 3 states, 'An experimental traffic order shall not remain in force for longer than 18 months'. Could this mean that the Queens Road TRO ceased to exist in June 2000?

Edited August 10, 2011 by Ronald

[dink 10]

The Council sent me a copy of the TRO relating to Queens Road and it appears the Order was made under Section 9 - Experimental traffic schemes - of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. The Order came into force on 16th December 1998. Sub section 3 states, 'An experimental traffic order shall not remain in force for longer than 18 months'. Could this mean that the Queens Road TRO ceases to exist in June 2000?

 

Does it say that it then becomes a permament one after 18 months?

[Ronald 10]

Does it say that it then becomes a permament one after 18 months?

I can't find anything that says it does but if you know different let me know.

[Ronald 10]

Just spoken to the Council's solicitor re the Queens Road TRO. He confirmed that it was made 'inadvertantly under Section 9- Experimental traffic schemes and has never been made a permanent TRO.

[sccsux 10]

He confirmed that it was made 'inadvertantly under Section 9- Experimental traffic schemes and has never been made a permanent TRO.

 

So the council baboons made yet another mistake in the implementation of bus lanes.

 

If the lane was made under S9, then any "fines" are invalid under their own rules:loopy:.

[holmac 10]

Just spoken to the Council's solicitor re the Queens Road TRO. He confirmed that it was made 'inadvertantly under Section 9- Experimental traffic schemes and has never been made a permanent TRO.

 

So the council baboons made yet another mistake in the implementation of bus lanes.

 

If the lane was made under S9, then any "fines" are invalid under their own rules:loopy:.

 

Im calling them in the morning as got stung on Queens Road going to work one day. Hope your right in that all "fines" are invalid. I paid mine last week but will be asking for £60 back within 30 days or telling them it can be reduced to £30 if they pay me back within 14 days. Cheers.

[Ronald 10]

Im calling them in the morning as got stung on Queens Road going to work one day. Hope your right in that all "fines" are invalid. I paid mine last week but will be asking for £60 back within 30 days or telling them it can be reduced to £30 if they pay me back within 14 days. Cheers.

 

I refused to pay my 'fine' and my representations were refused by Parking Services so I'm taking it to the Tribunal. We'll see how the Council proceeds then.

[WarPig 78]

Oh no, not this again.

 

I doubt that the people not incorrectly not using it are really annoying you.

 

What the heck does that mean:loopy:

[Ronald 10]

I forgot to mention that the TRO in question also applies to the following bus lanes: Broad Street, Brook Hill, Chatham Street, Duke Street, Harvest Lane, Mowbray Street and Western Bank:)

[Planner1 438]

Just spoken to the Council's solicitor re the Queens Road TRO. He confirmed that it was made 'inadvertantly under Section 9- Experimental traffic schemes and has never been made a permanent TRO.

I believe you need to recheck your facts.

 

The information I have is that the TRO is and always has been a permanent one and was advertised and processed as such. The mistake was that the TRO mentioned being made under the section of the relevant act which refers to experimental TRO's. My understanding is that this does not affect the legality of the order, because, once made, the validity of a TRO can only be challenged within 6 weeks of the order being made (PartVI, Section 35, Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984), so you are more than a little late for a TRO made in 1998. This being the case, an adjudicator could not overturn a PCN on the grounds you are stating.

Edited August 9, 2011 by Planner1