| Topic: | Re:Reply | |
| Posted by: | Peter Evans | |
| Date/Time: | 26/03/25 12:44:00 |
| As others have pointed out, passing the first ‘No Motor Vehicles’ sign is the actual infringement, unless subsequently accessing a property, despite Hounslow saying that passing both signs is what they’re trying to stop. Passing the first sign and doubling back without accessing a property would still seem to be an infringement, though probably not detected by the present cameras. Such an arrangement is often used on a cul de sac to stop non-residents driving in just to park. What’s significant in Thames Road is that passing through in less than a set, and potentially unknown time, as detected by two cameras, appears to be a newly invented prima facie infringement, irrespective of what a motorist might actually have done between the two signs. |