Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Wow.. where did you get this figure from? My FOI request came up with nearly 9000 from when enforcement began (November?) to 29 January, so this would be a huge escalation - and proof that it's a signage issue rather than deliberate lawbreaking!

Doesn't surprise me... That is the point of LTN anyway right? Lambeth must also be raking it in from the ones around Streatham. It's like a maze and one wrong turn and you get fined.


Townley road must be a nice little earner for Southwark as well as all the other ones. See cars there every single day at the restricted times. People just don't get the signs.

I?m confused, the planters are unacceptable because they permanently block the road preventing access at off peak hours and stopping emergency vehicles getting through, but camera controlled timed closures are a money making plot because drivers are too inattentive to read signs and incur fines.

If there really have been 22,000 fines issued in six weeks, then I think it suggests that there's something lacking in connection with the signage.


For that many people to have driven through a prohibited road unknowlingly (one assumes),it must be the result of something more than simply their being inatttentive.

Zak Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> For that many people to have driven through a

> prohibited road unknowlingly (one assumes),it must

> be the result of something more than simply their

> being inatttentive.


Do even 10% of cars obey the 20 limits across Southwark? I see at least a few drivers on a handheld mobile every time I go out. Drivers routinely ignore road rules and then complain about enforcement.

  • 1 month later...

Cora Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Definitely very poor signage. It is not just

> people 'ignoring restrictions'.


Totally agree. If you've driven a route for many years why would you be looking out for new signs?


If you want to create a LTN block the road and stop large school coaches bussing in kids from all over to Alleyns not penalising local resident drivers.


Totally scandalous. Who can afford ?65 just for a simple mistake. I also disagree with posts above claiming people who speed are same as those mistakenly driving in a road where new restrictions have been applied for who knows what reason.


How is stopping drivers at certain times on Townley Rd helping decrease pollution? It's clearly nonsense and just a way of swindling drivers once again.

A poster on the other thread about the fines in Dulwich Village has posted a copy of their letter with which they appealed the PCN and won and had it cancelled. It makes for excellent reading. Poster is called boomshake22. I recommend you read his/her letter if you need to appeal one of these PCNs.

fishbiscuits Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I've obviously missed something. Not been driving

> much recently. What's the deal with Townley Road?


Restricted access by penalty charge notice contraventions.

Jules-and-Boo Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> have they stopped the school coaches parking and

> blocking the traffic?


No, they?ve given them a free run by practically turning it into a one way street during rush hours, ironic when they were the cause of most of the congestion.

sweetgirl Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Just to make a point......

> In the little research I have done, many people

> who live out of the area are supporting the LTN's

> & road closures!

>

> Personally this is all nothing but a money

> spinner!

> Not quite sure how money prevents pollution......


Research? Do share. I'm on a semi-closed off road. I hate it.

As a local driving instructor these new closures signage all around dulwich not only confusing very stressful at certain times of the day the traffic is terrible and it pushes the problem somewhere else. If the council thinks its greener I don?t know who advised them because in my eyes it makes things much worse. I?m all for less pollution and well thought out traffic calming etc. Maybe put parking fees all in Dulwich village permit parking just other day two rather large shiny 4by4?s so desperate to park as close as possible to Gales causing unnecessary traffic congestion!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, afaics, the civil penalties mentioned  were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...