After issueing 6,200 tickets worth £400k, Waltham Forest Council plans to remove the controversial camera

Council admits fault and switches off bus lane camera

Council admits signs were not clear

Controversial camera to be permanently removed

First published in News
Last updated
This Is Local London: Photograph of the Author by , Reporter

A controversial new CCTV camera has been switched off after Waltham Forest Council admitted it was faulty.  

Thousands of tickets worth £400,000 had been issued by the council to hundreds of motorists after the 24 hour bus lane camera was installed near the traffic lights on the Green Man rounabout.  

In less than a month, 6,200 tickets had been issued, with many people receiving multiple fines each costing £65.  

In light of the controversy regarding the lack of clear signage for the camera, it has been switched off and will shortly be removed for good.

The sign warning of the camera ahead was not placed in the correct position, a sign detailing its hours of operation was sprayed over and the bus lane 'end' sign was not in line with the road markings.

In a statement released today, a spokeswoman for the council said:

"We understand that the static camera and sudden enforcement of the bus lane has created confusion for motorists and as soon as this came to light, we switched the camera off and stopped any further fixed penalty notices being issued.

"On investigation it has become apparent that the correct internal processes were not followed when the camera was erected and we appreciate that clearer signage should have been in place to warn motorists, especially since this bus lane is unlike most others in that it is effective 24 hours a day.

"We are taking appropriate action to rectify the situation including taking the camera down."

The camera was switched off last week and will be removed in the coming days.

Wood Street Post Office owner Aman Sadana, 23, appealed his three tickets on Friday.

"This is fantastic, " he said. "The camera shouldn't have been there from the start. They've finally woken up and smelt the coffee as to who was at fault and I look forward now to finding out their response to my appeal."

Another motorist to appeal his fine is John Davey from Leytonstone.

The 67 year-old, of Chadwick Road, said the result was "brilliant", but is now calling on the council to refund the many people who paid the fines.

"They've admitted taking lots of money from people when they shouldn't have and what about these poor devils that have paid the £65 fine?

"Will they be refunded? It is fantastic news but for many already hit, it is too late."

The Guardian has asked the council if it plans to refund the fines.

Comments (11)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:29am Thu 6 Mar 14

DogandDuck says...

The right thing for LBWF to do is cancel all PCN's issued using this camera and refund any payments already made. Richmond Council refunded "illegal" PCN's LBWF can so it too.

http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-england-lon
don-14918018

It looks to me as though this Bus Lane has been non-compliant with regulations since it was set up in 2006.

LBWF have made some changes but when I looked on Tuesday 4th March it still had some way to go to comply with Department for Transport rules and guidelines.

I would love to speak to the Council spokeswoman and help her word her statements.

The Bus Lane is illegal and non-compliant with regulations. The Traffic Order relating to the Bus Lane needs amending and the public need to be notified. The signs and road markings need to be made compliant.

If I can interpret the regulations and guidelines and tell them what is wrong then why can't their Highways professionals get it right? They are supposed to be the experts!
The right thing for LBWF to do is cancel all PCN's issued using this camera and refund any payments already made. Richmond Council refunded "illegal" PCN's LBWF can so it too. http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-england-lon don-14918018 It looks to me as though this Bus Lane has been non-compliant with regulations since it was set up in 2006. LBWF have made some changes but when I looked on Tuesday 4th March it still had some way to go to comply with Department for Transport rules and guidelines. I would love to speak to the Council spokeswoman and help her word her statements. The Bus Lane is illegal and non-compliant with regulations. The Traffic Order relating to the Bus Lane needs amending and the public need to be notified. The signs and road markings need to be made compliant. If I can interpret the regulations and guidelines and tell them what is wrong then why can't their Highways professionals get it right? They are supposed to be the experts! DogandDuck
  • Score: 15

9:25am Thu 6 Mar 14

HottRedMan says...

lol @ the enforcement of the bus lane had create confusion amongst motorists. I think LBWF created the "confusion"
Looks like they are going to do this somewhere else to gain money, LBWF are out to literally rape the motorist of money for this, especially now they have to refund tickets.

To make matters worst that camera is so small and very non standard.
lol @ the enforcement of the bus lane had create confusion amongst motorists. I think LBWF created the "confusion" Looks like they are going to do this somewhere else to gain money, LBWF are out to literally rape the motorist of money for this, especially now they have to refund tickets. To make matters worst that camera is so small and very non standard. HottRedMan
  • Score: 4

9:47am Thu 6 Mar 14

chingford lad says...

Are there any professional people employed by Waltham Forest council? by that I mean people who know the right thing to do. Perhaps the local Guardian paper might employ staff who can spell the word `issuing`.
Are there any professional people employed by Waltham Forest council? by that I mean people who know the right thing to do. Perhaps the local Guardian paper might employ staff who can spell the word `issuing`. chingford lad
  • Score: 7

9:49am Thu 6 Mar 14

Robert19 says...

I am confused as to what the council is going to do next. Do they have a bus lane or do they not? There is a lot of mea culpa (which is welcome - often mistakes are not acknowledged properly) but nothing about if they intend to keep the bus lane and if so how do they intend to maintain and enforce it legally. It does save a bit of time for bus users and generally (but obviously not all) motorists do observe the fact it is a bus lane. I would prefer it to be made legal with proper signs and markings and yes, if necessary, a camera.
I am confused as to what the council is going to do next. Do they have a bus lane or do they not? There is a lot of mea culpa (which is welcome - often mistakes are not acknowledged properly) but nothing about if they intend to keep the bus lane and if so how do they intend to maintain and enforce it legally. It does save a bit of time for bus users and generally (but obviously not all) motorists do observe the fact it is a bus lane. I would prefer it to be made legal with proper signs and markings and yes, if necessary, a camera. Robert19
  • Score: 4

4:58pm Fri 7 Mar 14

Villagecranberry says...

Yet another complete financial mess by the incompetent Labour Authotity who have now managed to turn a 400k brag of a gain into a to date unknown loss, as no doubt it will be after set up costs, legal bills, administation and so on. I cannot wait for a Freedom of Information application to be put in to establish how much the sum is going to cost the Council Taxpayers this time. But remember folks, they will all be voted in again next time round.
Yet another complete financial mess by the incompetent Labour Authotity who have now managed to turn a 400k brag of a gain into a to date unknown loss, as no doubt it will be after set up costs, legal bills, administation and so on. I cannot wait for a Freedom of Information application to be put in to establish how much the sum is going to cost the Council Taxpayers this time. But remember folks, they will all be voted in again next time round. Villagecranberry
  • Score: 5

5:33pm Fri 7 Mar 14

Thunderbird4 says...

chingford lad wrote:
Are there any professional people employed by Waltham Forest council? by that I mean people who know the right thing to do. Perhaps the local Guardian paper might employ staff who can spell the word `issuing`.
The council, like government, only employ people who are prepared to follow orders, and not necessarily, to have the ability to do a job correctly; this is to maintain the same people in power at the top, to help continue their schemes and to have control of the cash donated by the tax payer.

As for the Guardian spelling, it would appear their computers do not have the software that has auto checker/replace, as do all computers. The writers should use a manual spell check to be on the safe side. It's carelessness, but frankly, I couldn't care less anymore.
[quote][p][bold]chingford lad[/bold] wrote: Are there any professional people employed by Waltham Forest council? by that I mean people who know the right thing to do. Perhaps the local Guardian paper might employ staff who can spell the word `issuing`.[/p][/quote]The council, like government, only employ people who are prepared to follow orders, and not necessarily, to have the ability to do a job correctly; this is to maintain the same people in power at the top, to help continue their schemes and to have control of the cash donated by the tax payer. As for the Guardian spelling, it would appear their computers do not have the software that has auto checker/replace, as do all computers. The writers should use a manual spell check to be on the safe side. It's carelessness, but frankly, I couldn't care less anymore. Thunderbird4
  • Score: 3

5:55pm Fri 7 Mar 14

sensibility says...

It will be interesting to see if the Council refund the £400k automatically or whether everyone will have to write in for a refund.
It will be interesting to see if the Council refund the £400k automatically or whether everyone will have to write in for a refund. sensibility
  • Score: 9

6:24pm Fri 7 Mar 14

mdj says...

'The Guardian has asked the council if it plans to refund the fines'

judging by the story from a few years ago about the High Rd E11 box junction, they will only repay to those who appeal.

In legal parlance this is known as 'theft'
'The Guardian has asked the council if it plans to refund the fines' judging by the story from a few years ago about the High Rd E11 box junction, they will only repay to those who appeal. In legal parlance this is known as 'theft' mdj
  • Score: 11

6:49pm Fri 7 Mar 14

DogandDuck says...

To the Guardian reporter:-

Ignore the fact there is a camera.The bus lane is not compliant with Department for Transport regulations and guidelines. The bus lane is not enforceable because of illegal signs and road markings.
To the Guardian reporter:- Ignore the fact there is a camera.The bus lane is not compliant with Department for Transport regulations and guidelines. The bus lane is not enforceable because of illegal signs and road markings. DogandDuck
  • Score: 7

12:39pm Sat 8 Mar 14

DogandDuck says...

The LBWF Conservatives support a full refund.

https://twitter.com/
WFConservatives/stat
us/44170949622289612
8
The LBWF Conservatives support a full refund. https://twitter.com/ WFConservatives/stat us/44170949622289612 8 DogandDuck
  • Score: 4

6:38pm Sat 8 Mar 14

mdj says...

If they confine their comments to a medium most of us don't use it's hardly surprising most of us aren't even aware that they exist, let alone have opinions on anything!
If they confine their comments to a medium most of us don't use it's hardly surprising most of us aren't even aware that they exist, let alone have opinions on anything! mdj
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree