High Court rules signs surrounding Nottingham ‘bus gate’ are ‘inadequate’

The High Court has ruled signs surrounding a notorious city ‘bus gate’, which has led to fines for thousands of motorists, is ‘inadequate’.

The camera-monitored, bus-only zone on Shakespeare Street, brought in to protect pedestrians, led to almost £0.5 million in fines being handed out to thousands of drivers in the first nine months of 2016.

And a High Court judge last week ruled the signs are unclear.

Nottingham City Council, which issues Penalty Charge Notices to motorists, brought the case of taxi driver Mohammed Sattar to court.

Sattar was fined £60 by the authority for using the bus gate in November 2015 and his fine was overturned by an adjudicator in May 2016.

The authority says it took the case to court to “test” if the signs, indicating the presence of the restrictions and cameras monitoring the street, “comply with the statutory requirements”.

The council claimed a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO), legislation allowing the authority to restrict access on Shakespeare Street, created both a ‘bus gate’ and a pedestrian zone.

But the authority signed legislation stating the street is merely a pedestrian zone.

An adjudicator ruled the street was, in fact, a bus gate – and the pedestrian signage is wrong.

The adjudicator added the signage indicating the 24-hour bus gate is “too far away” from the stretch of the bus gate and not clearly visible to drivers.

The authority maintains the ruling will not affect anybody who has shelled out fines for encroaching the bus gate.

Typically, pedestrian zones outside of London are enforceable by the police – and not the local authority using cameras and bus lane legislation.

The street’s camera system led to the most driving fines in Nottingham in 2016.

It triggered fines totalling £460,658.43p between January and September.

Contraventions tend to be £60, reduced to £30 if paid within two weeks.

Nottingham City Council previously said the bus gate was introduced to meet Nottingham Trent University’s desire to improve the pedestrian safety of its students.

The authority made the TRO to reduce traffic flow in the area; but the adjudication ruled the bus gate is only used by student and school buses, and a tram replacement bus service.

In effect, it is not used by regular bus services.

Dr Stephen Sutcliffe was fined for encroaching the bus gate whilst driving to a wedding in April 2016.

He took the city council to a tribunal appealing his fine – and won.

Mr Sutcliffe argued the signage on the street was not clear enough, the route was not used by regular bus services and the street was merely a pedestrian zone and not a ‘bus gate’ – and consequently that the use of CCTV cameras on the road was unlawful.

He said the authority has argued all along the signage at both ends of the bus gate is “appropriate” and called on the authority to introduce “clear ‘bus gate’ signs”.

“In which case, the authority would be able to continue to operate cameras and catch people who drive down there,” he said. “At least it would be clearly identified as a bus gate.

He added “the council ought to put up some decent, advanced warning signs” and questioned the signage of similar bus gates in Friar Lane and Cheapside.

Between January and September 2016, the Cheapside bus gate accrued £95,420 in driving fines while the Friar Lane bus gate accrued £71,878.52p.

A city council spokesman said: “We believe they do [the signage does comply to legislation] but as the adjudicator had upheld some appeals based on signage, we needed to understand whether we could continue as we are or needed to make any changes.

“The adjudicator agreed with us that it was in the public interest to seek clarification and so we had agreed with them that whatever the outcome, neither party would seek costs against the other. This outcome therefore does not mean we are facing heavy legal costs.

“We used Mr Sattar’s case as an example to bring the issue to the High Court for a judge to provide clarification. It does not affect him and we were not looking to change the outcome of his case.

“We now need to look at the details of the judgement and decide how to proceed. However, the judgement will not alter those cases where people have accepted a fine on Shakespeare Street.”

A temporary electronic sign, warning drivers of the bus gate, was installed by the council in December.

The authority said this was a temporary measure.