Are PCN's being used as money-making exercises in London - the AA thinks so....

[Earl Aelfheah]

6 hours ago, Rockets said:

Errrm nah...don't you think it is important for people to fight against local authorities when they are clearly starting to abuse the powers given to them?

You drove into a clearly marked bus lane and got caught. You’re not Nelson Mandela ffs  🤣

Edited Saturday at 18:33 by Earl Aelfheah

[Rockets]

Ha ha, I didn't claim to be a freedom fighter, but if my posts annoy folks like you then I must be doing something right #notallheroeswearcapes

😉

[malumbu]

I expect that most are just bored, not irritated, by your protestations of innocence.

[first mate]

1 hour ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

You drove into a clearly marked bus lane and got caught. You’re not Nelson Mandela ffs  🤣

But, since it was not a deliberate action your phrasing and use of words like "caught" and Malumbu's use of "innocence" sounds really loaded. It is beginning to feel like some posters on this thread are in some way involved in how Southwark chooses to manage driving infractions. 

Edited Saturday at 20:22 by first mate

[Earl Aelfheah]

11 hours ago, first mate said:

since it was not a deliberate action your phrasing and use of words like "caught" and Malumbu's use of "innocence" sounds really loaded.

Oh, he wasn’t caught in a bus lane? What was he fined for then? 🤔

Helpfully, Rockets has told us, posting the response to his appeal:

Quote

We sent you a PCN because our camera evidence shows your vehicle in a bus lane at a time when only buses are allowed there.

When you are driving alongside a bus lane and you wish to take a left turning up ahead, you must not enter the bus lane too soon and drive along it before reaching the turning.

It’s just a year long tantrum across multiple threads. It’s embarrassing.

Edited yesterday at 07:30 by Earl Aelfheah

[first mate]

11 hours ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

It’s just a year long tantrum across multiple threads

Again, such loaded language, designed to belittle and play the man and not the ball. It is a difference of opinion. I get where Rocket's is coming from. The inconsistency in approach/ enforcement between TFL and S'wark council is not helpful and you wonder why. Why could S'wark not follow guidelines already set out by TFL?

[Earl Aelfheah]

The Highway Code, TfL, and Southwark all say what the rules are on the use of bus lanes and are entirely consistent with one another. Confidential internal guidance to TfL staff bulk handling appeals, obtained through FoI by people looking for loopholes, shouldn’t be used to decide whether or not to abide by those rules.

He insists his fine is unfair, not because of unclear signage, or any misunderstanding of the rules, but based of what he might have otherwise got away with on appeal had he been dealing with TfL. Well he wasn’t dealing with TfL.

Rockets hasn’t actually talked about what the rules allow, but how far you might be able to break them - and treats those things as though they’re the same. 

And it is a fact that he’s been moaning about this for nearly a year now, across multiple threads. It’s beyond boring.

Edited yesterday at 11:08 by Earl Aelfheah

[first mate]

I believe it is about motivation; an accidental momentary breach of a rule is not the same as a deliberate breach. TFL, rightly in my view, take a discretionary approach and if evidence suggests the breach was momentary and accidental, they waive the fine. Why can't Southwark do the same? They certainly have the money (huge PCN slush fund) to resource this. Someone in an earlier post said they may not have the appetite to review fines and that is the nub of it, I feel. It suits them and means revenue from all fines can be kept.

Also breaching the rule is in the first instance decided by a camera, so it has to be black and white, with no shades or grey ( a camera cannot decide if there are extenuating reasons for the breach). The shades of grey has to be a human decision, hence the two stage process, with fine and then appeal.

Edited yesterday at 09:30 by first mate

[Earl Aelfheah]

Again, Rockets hasn’t actually talked about what the rules allow, but how far you might be able to break them and get away with it - and treats those things as though they’re the same. So what might one reasonably infer about motivation?

Edited yesterday at 09:30 by Earl Aelfheah

[first mate]

No, he is debating a difference in approach by two enforcement bodies and querying that difference, especially when the two roads are so close together.

As I said above, like TFL, Southwark could easily resource and undertake a wider discretionary approach instead of choosing a simple black and white, computer says no, option. It is easy to conclude that the option to keep all fines revenue is too attractive.

[Earl Aelfheah]

Southwark cancelled over 23,000 PCNs on appeal last year. So clearly it is not the case they have a computer says no approach. The difference is in how two organisations operating on entirely different scales, bulk process appeals. The footage was reviewed and his appeal declined. Those are the facts. You seem to be assuming that the decision was a wrong one, but based on what? The fact that Rockets is annoyed and has gone on about it for months?

It sounds like he drove into a clearly marked bus lane and got caught.

Edited yesterday at 09:54 by Earl Aelfheah

[Rockets]

1 hour ago, first mate said:

Again, such loaded language, designed to belittle and play the man and not the ball. It is a difference of opinion.

Unfortunately this is where many stoop to when they have run out of a rational argument - I mean just look at the nonsense, belittling and name-calling from the usual suspects in the last few posts - the aggressive, belittling language is so common from some.

 

1 hour ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

He insists his fine is unfair, not because of unclear signage, or guidance, but based of what he might have otherwise got away with on appeal had he been dealing with TfL. Well he wasn’t dealing with TfL.

And this is exactly the point isnt it? That in the space of a few hundred metres bus lane markings (or where they end before a junction) and the guidance for fines when turning left can different so greatly. 

When you start to ask why does the bus lane marking stop so close to the junction of Overhill, yet so far from the junctions of Underhill and Wood Vale? Why have Southwark have placed a monitoring camera there?

Why? Because it is a money-making exercise. And yes, I suspect it is making a fortune from people trying to get passed queuing traffic going straight and not turning onto Overhiil but Southwark are fining people who would otherwise be let off on appeal for doing the same thing, as long as it was for less tha 20m, on TFL's road 100 metres up the road. 

This is exactly the type of money-making exercises that the AA is flagging - it is councils abusing the powers they have been given to raise revenues. I wonder if it gets to the point where councils have the facility to do this removed from central government.

13 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

Southwark cancelled over 23,000 PCNs on appeal last year. So clearly it is not the case they have a computer says no approach.

To be fair @Earl Aelfheah Southwark were forced to cancel many due to incorrect road markings, signage or implementation and execution of fines....just saying....they're having to repay a huge amount we were only discussing on this forum recently.

BBC News - Motorists to get refunds on 10,000 bus lane fines

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cjdy9z0pxnmo

Have you also looked at the increases in the rates they are issuing PCNs...isnt Southwark near the top of the leaderboard on that?

Edited yesterday at 10:03 by Rockets

[Earl Aelfheah]

11 minutes ago, Rockets said:

And this is exactly the point isnt it? That in the space of a few hundred metres bus lane markings (or where they end before a junction) and the guidance for fines when turning left can different so greatly. 

Again, the ‘guidance’ for fines is not different. You’re conflating what the rules are, with what you might be able to get away with on appeal, after breaking them. You seem to think the two are the same and it says a lot imo about motivation. 
If you’re unclear, read t what it says in the Highway Code, the public guidance from TfL and Southwark… read the signs. You seem to think that whether or not you comply should be based on a confidential internal note to staff on bulk processing of appeal decisions, obtained through FOI. In other words, you’re not interested following the rules, but in breaking them and avoiding consequences. Well ok, but don’t cry about it and claim it’s unjust when you don’t manage to slip through your loophole.

Edited yesterday at 10:04 by Earl Aelfheah

[DulvilleRes]

On 30/10/2025 at 23:00, Rockets said:

Hey @Earl Aelfheah so the 20m thing is a thing then after all...I won't to say I told you so but I....you were wrong.

Southwark supplied a still frame but I am very reluctant to share it here as it would identify my car to my sworn enemies and such is the anti-Rockets sentiment expressed by many on here I fear for reprisals! 😉 Of course I dont but by heck I am not going to let anyone see the make, model and colour of my car on this forum for fear they identify where I live!

 

.

This is interesting - Rockets is happy to attempt to 'out' other people on these threads, but when it comes to himself, not so much! 

[first mate]

2 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

with what you might be able to get away with

Again, you indicate a motivation that probably does not exist in most cases, as in 'trying to get away with'. A driver that accidentally and momentarily breaks a rule and then self corrects is not trying to get away with anything. Fines are issued because cameras cannot make discretionary decisions, so an appeals process exists for just that. However, it seems Southwark may prefer to simply stick to camera results- as in black and white.

How many of the successful appeals you refer to do not involve incorrect issue or technical/ admin errors by Southwark? It seems like a large slice of the figure you referred to is down to Southwark mistakes in the first place.

[Rockets]

8 minutes ago, DulvilleRes said:

This is interesting - Rockets is happy to attempt to 'out' other people on these threads, but when it comes to himself, not so much! 

@first mate I think the "outing" to which @DulvilleRes refers (incorrectly in my defence) was when I pointed out that the Dulwich Society transport sub-committee chair (who was appointed under controversial circumstances) was an award winning active travel campaigner who had won LCC's active travel campaigner of the year.

That wasn't an outing but it was clearly a connection some were keen not to be made public despite the fact the information was blasted all over the active travel media.

16 minutes ago, first mate said:

How many of the successful appeals you refer to do not involve incorrect issue or technical/ admin errors by Southwark? It seems like a large slice of the figure you referred to is down to Southwark mistakes in the first place.

They are having to repay 10,000 for a five month period of incorrect fines being issued this year alone.

[Earl Aelfheah]

1 hour ago, first mate said:

Again, you indicate a motivation

Rocket’s complaint isn’t that the rules weren’t properly applied as they exist; No, the bus lane is well marked and signed, it's an easy turn into a one way street. There is no reason to be in the bus lane. All Southwark are doing is enforcing clear rules.

The use of FOI requests to test how far you can push the rules and, whilst not avoid an initial fine, perhaps get it dropped later - suggests that one is not looking to abide by the rules, but to get away with breaking them. That does speak to motivation.

Edited yesterday at 12:00 by Earl Aelfheah

[Rockets]

7 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

There is no reason to be in the bus lane. All Southwark are doing is enforcing clear rules.

Why is it then that TFL gives you 20m grace on their roads if you appeal? Are their roads more difficult to negotiate a left turn on or is there, perhaps, a differing set of motivations between TFL and Southwark for the purpose of the policing?

A case of "ding ding - keep the buses moving" versus "cher-ching - keep the revenue flowing"?

 

Edited yesterday at 10:34 by Rockets

[Earl Aelfheah]

11 minutes ago, Rockets said:

They are having to repay 10,000 for a five month period of incorrect fines being issued

Not included in the figures I provided, which are for the most recent year reported

Edited yesterday at 10:35 by Earl Aelfheah

[malumbu]

31 minutes ago, first mate said:

Again, you indicate a motivation that probably does not exist in most cases, as in 'trying to get away with'. A driver that accidentally and momentarily breaks a rule and then self corrects is not trying to get away with anything. Fines are issued because cameras cannot make discretionary decisions, so an appeals process exists for just that. However, it seems Southwark may prefer to simply stick to camera results- as in black and white.

 

No such thing as an accident.  You are making an excuse for inattentive/poor driving.  It's up to the enforcement authority how much flexibility and discretion they use.  Just take it on the chin and learn from your mistakes.  It took me years to realise that.  

As for different approaches, as frustrating as that may be, that is life.  You'll have different parking restrictions, different speed limits (the short section of 30mph on Crystal Palace parade as you are briefly in Bromley is bizarre, etc.  If you want a totally uniform approach across the country then lobby your MP.  The local one will tell you that it is Labour policy for local authorities to make local decisions.

[Earl Aelfheah]

39 minutes ago, Rockets said:

Why is it then that TFL gives you 20m grace on their roads if you appeal?

To be clear, there is no difference in the rules as they apply to bus lanes. TfL will fine you if you're in one when you shouldn't be, in line with the guidance in the Highway Code and the signage that is on the road. Most people don't appeal the fine they receive and it's quite clear that TfL don't consider it acceptable to be in a bus lane for 20m before turning. Their website states:

Quote

If you want to turn left across a bus lane, an arrow or a dotted white line on the carriageway will indicate if this is permitted.

Their internal, confidential, guidance to staff bulk processing thousands of appeals, obviously involves some decisions about which cases are worth pursuing under a challenge, especially as they might ultimately end up having to take them to court with all the time and money associated with that. You’re conflating what is permitted, with what you might be able to get away with. It completely exposes First Mates argument that you are being inadvertently caught out just trying to follow the rules.

All this noise and bluster is so, so tedious. The bottom line is that the bus lane is well marked and signed, it's an easy turn into a one way street. There is no reason to be in the bus lane and all Southwark have done is appropriately enforce what are clear rules. Maybe accept your error and take it on the chin like a grown up.

Edited yesterday at 11:13 by Earl Aelfheah

[Rockets]

1 hour ago, Rockets said:

Why is it then that TFL gives you 20m grace on their roads if you appeal? Are their roads more difficult to negotiate a left turn on or is there, perhaps, a differing set of motivations between TFL and Southwark for the purpose of the policing?

A case of "ding ding - keep the buses moving" versus "cher-ching - keep the revenue flowing"?

But @Earl Aelfheah why do TFL police things differently? Bottom-line is, increasingly, local authorities are abusing their powers and using interventions for money-making purposes. That part is abundantly clear and only those who are ideologically or politically aligned with councils could argue against it.

I mean, even the AA are trying to hold local authorities to account over such practices.

I very much suspect that with like so many of the discussions on this thread over years I will be proved to have been right and when I remind some of you of that I very much doubt you will "take it on the chin like a grown-up".

Honestly, why do you all feel the need to resort to name-calling, it's ludicrous and presents your side of the argument in a very poor light.  The last few posts have aptly demonstrated the aggressive demonising some of you resort to when someone presents an argument that differs to your own. So many people have withdrawn from these discussions due to this demonising approach and it looks like it's a deliberate tactic being deployed by some - and we're the ones being told to grow up! 😉

[Earl Aelfheah]

Were you unaware that driving in the bus lane might result in a fine? I doubt it.

Were you unaware that you were in the bus lane? Again, seems unlikely.

Do you think that the use of FOI requests to get hold of confidential internal guidance to staff dealing with the bulk processing of appeals, in order to work out where you may be able to get away with breaking the rules, suggests someone being caught out just trying to follow the rules? No.

You’re not fighting the good fight, you’re throwing a very public slow motion tantrum because you got a fine.

Edited yesterday at 12:44 by Earl Aelfheah

[Penguin68]

Some of these responses read almost like those of officials responsible for actual decisions and defending them. Surely not! 

[Rockets]

12 minutes ago, Penguin68 said:

Some of these responses read almost like those of officials responsible for actual decisions and defending them. Surely not! 

Therein lies the problem nowadays - people become so ideologically and/or politically entrenched in a position that they cannot step back, be pragmatic and say...yeah, that's a bit off. Instead they try to defend it to the death, probsbly deep down knowing that what is happening isn't right.