Rockets

No @Earl Aelfheah you're doing what you always do - not reading things properly, taking things people post out of context and then creating a false narrative. The intervention I have always referred to in this regard was before the LTN was put in place. It was during the OHS implementation when the junction was still open to vehicles (around 2017/18). The council did local monitoring around the junction and published the results in their report and the results showed there had been an increase in pollution around the junction post implementation. I suspect it was the last time the council did localised monitoring of one of their interventions as it showed they had made pollution worse as they had created congestion, they then pivoted for "area wide" monitoring on a number of bars for "success" of the LTNs. And what happened when the DV LTN went in - congestion increased along Dulwich Village? So it doesn't take a genius to work out that if pollution increased when congestion did during OHS implementation then it must have done post DV LTN - it's just the council weren't publishing local pollution data as they did post OHS.

I just knew you would have to have the last say….;-)

@Earl Aelfheah all you're doing is validating the very point I was making. Thank you. I stand by everything I said but only in the context of the discussion it was said in! ;-) Now I am going to go and "put my big boy pants on". ;-) It is because the Southwark reports showed pollution increased after those changes. You cannot deny that.

Ok........I said I didn't want to bore people but that was in relation to the increases in pollution recorded (and published as part of their report) by Southwark council after the implementation of the OHS changes to the junction of DV and Calton (in around 2017/2018 I believe) when it was still open to traffic. Southwark's own monitoring showed pollution increased. And before you ask let me put the record straight on your third claim: This was in relation to risk (both perceived and real) to pedestrians from cyclists through the DV junction once cars had been removed. I made the point that when it was a vehicular junction there was an order to it - cars flowed, then they stopped, pedestrians crossed and that since the road was closed to vehicles and it was made a cycle lane that the order had been lost and it was far more of a free for all. Again a long way from what you claim I said. There have been a lot of admin errors recently.....some think this is because Southwark is only concerned about the money-making element of these measures.

@Earl Aelfheah honestly, I don't want to bore people with having to correct you but time and time again you seem to interpret what people say to suit your own narrative/agenda and willfully misrepresent what they say. This is what I have the biggest problem with. Often what you claim people say bears no resemblance to what was actually said. Let's take this as an example: The Dulwich filter increased crime, when crime has been broadly flat since 2018, and trended down against the London average What I actually said was that since the filter went in certain types of crime on the surrounding streets have gone up. Which they have. Which is fact. You may not like it but please try to be accurate from now onwards as what you have claimed I have said is a long way from what I was actually saying. And this is exactly the point a lot of people miss as they tell everyone "them be the rules". The point is whether the council are deliberately going out of their way to create places where it becomes easier to infringe and then monetise that spot. Certainly a lot of people think they do and the AA is accusing councils of doing just this. (BTW it was a £65 fine that jumped to £130 but look how the council words their letters - you can see why so many people just pay up the AA alluded to this issue too) You can pay the discount charge of £65.00 if your payment reaches us within 14 days of the date of this letter. You can pay £130.00 within 28 days of the date shown on your PCN. You can formally challenge your PCN by using an Enforcement Notice form. The vehicle's owner will automatically receive the form if the PCN has not been paid within 28 days of the date shown on it. The form offers you the chance to formally challenge your PCN or pay the full £130.00. If you decide to formally challenge your PCN, please do not write to us again but wait until the Enforcement Notice form arrives When I read posters refer to me as "very, very childish", suggesting it's time to "put the big boy pants on" or that I am indulging in some sort of "pity party" I do laugh and wonder whether I am not actually the childish one here! 😉

But clearly nothing to do with the Dulwich Village LTN consultation....to which respondents, overwhelmingly, opposed the measures.

Did the council issue a PCN for him too.....my goodness me!!! Is no-one safe from their money-making exercises!!! 😉

Ha ha, the bit you missed off was that you were responding to a question to back-up your assertion that there was majority support for the LTNs. What you actually said was "majority support recorded for both schemes during consultation" and when challenged you presented the 55% stat - which was, as you might say, objectively false. Yes it does and look even the wording of the letter from my appeal confirms that, according to Southwark bus lanes finish when they are level with the turning (always interesting to note that TFL the bus lanes further along the road break well before the turning) - they very much appear to be implementing what the AA referred to as "one wheel over the line". Of course, for some, that is perfectly reasonable but those of a more reasonable disposition may think it is a bit underhand and part of a money-making exercise from the council. I bet it is earning them a fortune. 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. Instead, you need to turn across the bus lane at the point - usually level with the turning - where its line has changed from solid to broken or where arrows on the road show where to turn.

@AylwardS whilst working at the council did you see any behaviour that suggested the motivation for PCNs was an opportunity to raise revenue or that PCNs were seen as a good way to raise revenue? I wasn't in it - I went across it - so yes I was momentarily driving across it. What @Earl Aelfheah seems to (deliberately) ignore is the fact that, as the AA says, you only have to put one wheel over the line and councils will fine you. So whilst they relentlessly say: "you broke the rules" the debate is not whether I, and others I am sure, broke the rules, but whether the council is deliberately creating situations to get people to break the rules so they can issue money-making fines. Clearly, the AA thinks they are. I am sure others who pass that junction and compare it to the TFL ones at Underhill and Wood Vale will feel the same (interestingly the image that Earl shared from GoogleMaps creates a bit of an optical and doesn't show how close to the apex of the junction the bus lane actually finishes at Overhill).@Earl Aelfheah clearly doesn't and that's their prerogative but I would sense that they are probably in the minority as any rational and balanced analysis of the three junctions in question would validate the theory that councils are making it easier for drivers to break the rules and for the council to make money. You're more than a "little sceptical" 😉 I do find this a little rich coming from you when you aggressively argued that there was majority support for the DV LTNs during the consultation when the reality was majority opposition. #justsaying I do think councils will probably lose their powers to police these things themselves if they continue to abuse the powers they have been given. It is clear there is a growing narrative that councils are abusing their powers and sooner or later they will have to course-correct or lose the powers they have been entrusted with. But let's be honest, council's could admit that they were laying money-making traps for drivers and some on here would probably still try to defend them!

@Moovart the AA spokesperson said exactly that in the original article at the top of this thread: “Sadly, too many drivers, who are certain they did nothing wrong or the road and sign layout was in effect a trap, paid the half-rate within 14 days instead of contesting the PCN. Such is the fear of having to pay fines that are more than a day’s wages and often don’t fit the nature of the offence, such as being one wheel over the line.”

Have you complained to the solicitor directly and did they respond within the 8 weeks they have under their code of conduct - I presume they have and this is why you have escalated further to the SRA? If he doesn't respond in a timely fashion per the SRA code of conduct then I am sure they will need to take action.

As I was saying......

@Earl Aelfheah you're embellishing my experience for your own effect (again) - I wasn't caught driving in a bus lane I was fined for driving across a bus lane in the action of turning left onto Overhill Road......please try to get your facts right - I am sure you'll agree that accuracy is so important! @first mate after the incident where a Southwark councillor (and then Southwark housing chief) was caught setting up a fake social media account to call local residents "pathetic" when they opposed a housing project he was responsible for I am pretty sure councillors or council officials are not silly enough to engage in such activities - although the repeated name-calling is very familiar! Clearly some posting on here have strong links to the active travel lobby and the council but I doubt any will ever declare it.

The scary thing is you dont have to travel far out of Dulwich to see the flags flying.

Thanks @Earl Aelfheah - perfect timing.. #whatwasIjustsaying

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.

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! 😉

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"?

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

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. 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. 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?

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 😉

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? I mean Southwark is having to repay a lot of people for fines that were issued incorrectly...do you not agree with that? The fact the AA felt compelled to call out London councils over this shows how the mood board is shifting against these money-making exercises. Look, we understand that many of the posters on here will defend the council to the death over anything and everything. But we also understand that that is not being driven by commonsense or pragmatism but by politics and/or idealogy. Some will turn a blind-eye so some clear abuses of power because it doesnt suit their own, or political party's, agenda. Some of the biggest Southwark supporters don't even live in the borough which makes it all the more strange. Maybe it's time local authorities starting taking some responsibility and not looking at some of their constituents as just revenue generating opportunities.

Coming from you @snowy I look on this as a badge of honour and might get it framed for my living room! 😉 And this is the point, there are many examples, like Overhill Road (which I am sure is making a lot of money from unsuspecting drivers) that look like traffic implementations that serve no other purpose than to make money and this is a council that has a long history of putting profit before people. @malumbu I am intrigued as to what you posted! 😉

You've gone a bit Alan Patridge again.... Why on earth would I need to eat humble pie, I really can't fathom what your point is?

No @Earl Aelfheah I was turning left into Overhill so I was not using the bus lane to queue jump (as I know a lot of people do). Any thoughts on the bus lane outside the shops (or are you trying to avoid that question) - should cars be liable to a fine if they turn across the bus lane to park there - as, per Southwark's own guidance, turning across a solid bus lane is not permitted?