Definition of a Bus Gate and the possible legal ramifications

[veryannoyed]

Well the secretary of state has certain powers conferred by The Road traffic Act and The Road Traffic Regulation Act which enable him to make regulations.

The problem is that you are concentrating on the council having marked the road surface with the words "Bus Gate". There should also be other signage present indicating the route was solely for buses. They could just have easily marked the road "no pedestrians", but if the correct signage also showed the route was for buses only you would have committed an offence.

When you received your PCN did you go back to check the signage? if it did not comply did you check to see if the council had obtained permission to vary the signage? did you check if a TRO was in place?
Or did you just think, I've never heard of a bus gate, it ain't in the Highway Code so it can't be right.

However there have been numerous complaints from all round the country about the signage of bus gates being inadequate or confusing, so you aren't alone

Sorry only just seen this photo. I know its way to late but the council have really screwed up on signage. It looks like they have omitted the no entry signs as per the signs manual for bus lanes.

[Superted]

Can a council install a bus gate on a one way street which is not actually a bus route?

[des8]

Well they can, but whether they may or should is a different matter.

Superted If you are looking for help please start a new thread and not reactivate one that is 3 years old

[A1LOG]

I received a fine from Bristol Council for going through a bus gate. I appealed the fine due to there being diversion signs that routed me to the bus gate, and on arriving at bus gate there was another diversion sign directing traffic through the bus gate, it was also on a one way street and no other alternative to avoid crossing the bus gate. They refused my appeal on the grounds that signage is clearly marked, but they did not address the fact there was diversion signage in place diverting traffic through the bus gate and the diversion signage didn't stipulate what vehicles diversion signage was for, therefore applies to all vehicles
The other point in question was that it was a one way system and I had no option to turn around as I would have broken a law of driving wrong way along a one way street.
I am not from Bristol and only drove through on that day, I adhered to all road signage and didn't enter any bus lanes etc but was under the impression that all traffic has the legal requirement to follow temporary diversion route marked with red diversion signage.
I plan on sending it to tribunal, but would appreciate any advice or feedback off anyone who may have had similar experience or if there is a legal precedent in regards to diversions taking priority over standard road signage.

[PallasAthena]

A1LOG If you are looking for help please start a new thread of your own and not reactivate someone else's that is over 4 years old. You are more likely to get useful replies from a new thread.

[des8]

or try posting on Pepipoo (http://www.pepipoo.com/)

[Bustagate]

The post about Beresfod Road, Reading shows views "before" and "after" the change from "No Entry" signs to the blue roundels showing a bus (diagram 953 of TSRGD 2016 Schedule 3 Part 2). Before the change to civil enforcement, the DfT recommended the use of "No Entry" signs with a supplementary plate specifying the exceptions. These were far more immediately meaningful to motorists than the blue roundels and so were more effective at keeping them out.

When civil enforcement was introduced, passing a "No Entry" sign when you weren't one of the specified exceptions remained a criminal-only offence. It could only be enforced by the police and incurred points on your licence. Passing a blue roundel to diagram 953 could be the subject of either criminal or civil enforcement. Local authorities were encouraged to switch to the blue roundel so that the police would no longer be burdened with enforcement. So it's a feature of civil enforcement that local authorities changed to the far less effective blue roundels (which happened to be more lucrative for them).

When making the switch, some authorities, e.g. Cambridge, added signs to direct motorists away from the prohibited section of road. Below are some of the signs which they use.
[IMG]https://legalbeagles.info/forums/image/gif;******,R0lGODlhAQABAPABAP///wAAACH5BAEKAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAICRAEAOw==[/IMG]
Cambridge use warnings of bus lane cameras ahead to put motorists on guard; most roads near bus gates are 20 mph anyway, so it's easier to take in what the sign is telling you. The signs which show where Other traffic is to go appear at the last exit before the bus gate. The rightmost combination of signs appears at the bus gate itself. Brighton & Hove also use these signs (but not, so far as I know, the "Bus lane cameras ahead").

People appealing on the grounds of inadequate signage can refer to the TMA 2004 statutory guidance to local authorities which advises

Local authorities should aim to increase compliance with bus lane and moving traffic regulations through clear, well designed, legal, and enforced controls including clear traffic signing which can readily be understood from a moving vehicle.

Cambridge and Brighton & Hove show what can be done. I consider that their signs can indeed "readily be understood from a moving vehicle". Adjudicators should be asked to consider whether the signage which led to the issuing of the PCN met the statutory guidance. If the event occurred at night, they should also consider how visible the signs were: Google Street Views during daytime don't correspond to what you see at night. For PCNs issued in the early hours when no buses are running, the adjudication in the Beresford Road case shows that no infraction may have occurred as there was no possible effect on bus services.