Lendal Bridge fines to be refunded

Lendal Bridge in York

Lendal Bridge in York

First published in News
Last updated
York Press: Photograph of the Author by

CITY of York Council has decided to refund money to almost 60,000 motorists fined for driving over Lendal Bridge.

Controversial traffic restrictions were introduced on Lendal Bridge last August but the trial was abandoned after an independent review found the council may have acted unlawfully.

A process for the public to claim back the money is currently being worked on, City of York Council has confirmed. Motorists will have to claim a refund in order to get their money back.

Some 56,000 drivers have been issued penalty notices amounting to £1.3 million for driving over Lendal Bridge since the restrictions were put in place, on a trial basis, in August 2013. Additional costs for setting up the project were in the region of £500,000. A City of York spokeswoman has said they cannot yet anticipate the cost of repaying the fines.

The decision does not affect fines given in Coppergate.

On the basis of independent legal advice, the City of York Council had been contesting the Traffic Adjudicator’s challenge to both the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate schemes. It will now only continue to contest the Coppergate order.

Cllr James Alexander said about the decision:  “Councillors from all parties have told me that they want to move on, and they are right. It is for this reason, to draw the matter to a close and as a gesture of goodwill, that we make this announcement today.

“The council does not accept the finding of the Traffic Penalty Tribunal as regards the lawful ability to regulate traffic in this way, and is therefore continuing to pursue a  review of the Tribunal’s decision in relation to the permanent Coppergate order.

“However, the Lendal Bridge trial has now finished, and for this reason, the  council does not consider it to be in the public interest to pursue the review in respect of Lendal Bridge.

“The council has taken the decision that in respect of those people who received a fine during the trial traffic regulation of Lendal Bridge, a refund will be made if they make a particular request to the council. This is due to the clear level of public concern during the trial. It is hoped that this can be seen as a statement of goodwill  and we are drawing a line under the matter.”

Cllr David Levene, cabinet member for transport, said the trial “was never about making money" and that work had to be done to resolve traffic issues in York.

He said:  “But whilst the trial achieved some of its aims, it had become too polarizing an issue, requiring too much  resource, and so detracting from other necessary transport policies.”

Comments (44)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:40am Sat 12 Jul 14

nowthen says...

This isn't a goodwill gesture, it's the nearest thing to an apology that we're likely to get from this bunch of incompetents. Too little too late the damage's done. None of the Labour led Council has the cojones to admit they got it wrong. In the private sector this fiasco would be a sacking offence. Come on Merrett and Alexander do the right thing.
This isn't a goodwill gesture, it's the nearest thing to an apology that we're likely to get from this bunch of incompetents. Too little too late the damage's done. None of the Labour led Council has the cojones to admit they got it wrong. In the private sector this fiasco would be a sacking offence. Come on Merrett and Alexander do the right thing. nowthen
  • Score: -198

7:46am Sat 12 Jul 14

pedalling paul says...

Sadly every political group tries to present itself as the motorists friend when elections are on the horizon. But none of then can ever deliver a car users paradise..
About time there was cross party consensus on this, and a willingness to publicly adhere to the overarching goal of our Local Transport Plan which sensibly seeks to reduce car dependancy further. Perhaps York's recently announced further grant from Govt's Local Sustainable Transport Fund will aid that process.
Sadly every political group tries to present itself as the motorists friend when elections are on the horizon. But none of then can ever deliver a car users paradise.. About time there was cross party consensus on this, and a willingness to publicly adhere to the overarching goal of our Local Transport Plan which sensibly seeks to reduce car dependancy further. Perhaps York's recently announced further grant from Govt's Local Sustainable Transport Fund will aid that process. pedalling paul
  • Score: 237

8:02am Sat 12 Jul 14

JasBro says...

pedalling paul wrote:
Sadly every political group tries to present itself as the motorists friend when elections are on the horizon. But none of then can ever deliver a car users paradise..
About time there was cross party consensus on this, and a willingness to publicly adhere to the overarching goal of our Local Transport Plan which sensibly seeks to reduce car dependancy further. Perhaps York's recently announced further grant from Govt's Local Sustainable Transport Fund will aid that process.
Nobody has asked for a car user's paradise, nobody expects a car user's paradise and I think people are heartily sick of your glib cliches and over simplifications .

The fact is that the policies you support have created more congestion and more pollution over the last decade, for the same amount of traffic.

Getting back to the topic in hand. The fines should have been paid back as soon as they were declared illegal, and people should not have to request a repayment, it should be done automatically.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: Sadly every political group tries to present itself as the motorists friend when elections are on the horizon. But none of then can ever deliver a car users paradise.. About time there was cross party consensus on this, and a willingness to publicly adhere to the overarching goal of our Local Transport Plan which sensibly seeks to reduce car dependancy further. Perhaps York's recently announced further grant from Govt's Local Sustainable Transport Fund will aid that process.[/p][/quote]Nobody has asked for a car user's paradise, nobody expects a car user's paradise and I think people are heartily sick of your glib cliches and over simplifications . The fact is that the policies you support have created more congestion and more pollution over the last decade, for the same amount of traffic. Getting back to the topic in hand. The fines should have been paid back as soon as they were declared illegal, and people should not have to request a repayment, it should be done automatically. JasBro
  • Score: -195

8:13am Sat 12 Jul 14

julia brica says...

We the "council" decided. No you didn't it was decided for you.

A gesture of goodwill ? James wouldn't know one if it jumped up and bit him.

More spin and lies................
....roll on the next elections.
We the "council" decided. No you didn't it was decided for you. A gesture of goodwill ? James wouldn't know one if it jumped up and bit him. More spin and lies................ ....roll on the next elections. julia brica
  • Score: -198

8:14am Sat 12 Jul 14

Bailed Out says...

People should be refunded straight away and compensated. Why should they have to claim? Time for some resignations.
People should be refunded straight away and compensated. Why should they have to claim? Time for some resignations. Bailed Out
  • Score: -181

8:34am Sat 12 Jul 14

pedalling paul says...

JasBro wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
Sadly every political group tries to present itself as the motorists friend when elections are on the horizon. But none of then can ever deliver a car users paradise..
About time there was cross party consensus on this, and a willingness to publicly adhere to the overarching goal of our Local Transport Plan which sensibly seeks to reduce car dependancy further. Perhaps York's recently announced further grant from Govt's Local Sustainable Transport Fund will aid that process.
Nobody has asked for a car user's paradise, nobody expects a car user's paradise and I think people are heartily sick of your glib cliches and over simplifications .

The fact is that the policies you support have created more congestion and more pollution over the last decade, for the same amount of traffic.

Getting back to the topic in hand. The fines should have been paid back as soon as they were declared illegal, and people should not have to request a repayment, it should be done automatically.
"The same amount of traffic" is a direct consequence of the past policies of Local Transport Plans 1 & 2, to restrain increases in car use. Without that, York would already be experiencing the gridlock that LTP3 now seeks to address.The successful consequence has been stabilisation of peak car use levels since 2006.
But York cannot afford to relax on its laurels. It is expected that there will be a significant growth in jobs and housing over the next 15 - 20 years. The make up of York's population will also change over this period, with more older and dependent people expected to be living in the city. This will increase the pressures on the transport network, which could lead to current levels of delay increasing contributing to more emissions of greenhouse gases and pollutants that affect air quality in some areas of the city.
Whichever party we elect to lead from 2015 will have to seriously support LTP3, to head off the long term threat posed by greater car use levels. I hope that the planned Congestion Commission will achieve this.
This strategy is intended to benefit those who need to use a motor vehicle rather than those who want to.
Try looking beyond the next elections, and beyond your lifetime.
[quote][p][bold]JasBro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: Sadly every political group tries to present itself as the motorists friend when elections are on the horizon. But none of then can ever deliver a car users paradise.. About time there was cross party consensus on this, and a willingness to publicly adhere to the overarching goal of our Local Transport Plan which sensibly seeks to reduce car dependancy further. Perhaps York's recently announced further grant from Govt's Local Sustainable Transport Fund will aid that process.[/p][/quote]Nobody has asked for a car user's paradise, nobody expects a car user's paradise and I think people are heartily sick of your glib cliches and over simplifications . The fact is that the policies you support have created more congestion and more pollution over the last decade, for the same amount of traffic. Getting back to the topic in hand. The fines should have been paid back as soon as they were declared illegal, and people should not have to request a repayment, it should be done automatically.[/p][/quote]"The same amount of traffic" is a direct consequence of the past policies of Local Transport Plans 1 & 2, to restrain increases in car use. Without that, York would already be experiencing the gridlock that LTP3 now seeks to address.The successful consequence has been stabilisation of peak car use levels since 2006. But York cannot afford to relax on its laurels. It is expected that there will be a significant growth in jobs and housing over the next 15 - 20 years. The make up of York's population will also change over this period, with more older and dependent people expected to be living in the city. This will increase the pressures on the transport network, which could lead to current levels of delay increasing contributing to more emissions of greenhouse gases and pollutants that affect air quality in some areas of the city. Whichever party we elect to lead from 2015 will have to seriously support LTP3, to head off the long term threat posed by greater car use levels. I hope that the planned Congestion Commission will achieve this. This strategy is intended to benefit those who need to use a motor vehicle rather than those who want to. Try looking beyond the next elections, and beyond your lifetime. pedalling paul
  • Score: 232

8:35am Sat 12 Jul 14

York2000 says...

Good news for people fined. The bridge closure should not have happened. A lesson for the current council and future councils.

The ten or so readers who make up the Press right wing comments team are going to be salivating over this article this morning. . .
Good news for people fined. The bridge closure should not have happened. A lesson for the current council and future councils. The ten or so readers who make up the Press right wing comments team are going to be salivating over this article this morning. . . York2000
  • Score: -98

8:40am Sat 12 Jul 14

Oaklands Resident says...

The Councils accounts for the last financial year reveal that it took £1.8 million in ANPR camera fine income on Lendal and Coppergate.

However it spent over £700,000 administering the schemes. To this must be added the costs of the "appeal"

So it has £1 million available for refunds. Hence the decision to pay out only on Lendal Bridge.

However they have no idea how much the administrative costs of the refund exercise will be and, if the traffic adjudicators final judgement on Coppergate comes down against the Council, then taxpayers will have to stump up the difference.

There may be room for two viewpoints on whether this trial was justified in the first place but it was clear, within 6 weeks of it being started, that there was something seriously wrong and that it needed to be suspended immediately.

It is the failure of the Council Leadership to recognise failure earlier, and their decision two weeks ago to block an independent inquiry into what went wrong, which should lead to resignations.
The Councils accounts for the last financial year reveal that it took £1.8 million in ANPR camera fine income on Lendal and Coppergate. However it spent over £700,000 administering the schemes. To this must be added the costs of the "appeal" So it has £1 million available for refunds. Hence the decision to pay out only on Lendal Bridge. However they have no idea how much the administrative costs of the refund exercise will be and, if the traffic adjudicators final judgement on Coppergate comes down against the Council, then taxpayers will have to stump up the difference. There may be room for two viewpoints on whether this trial was justified in the first place but it was clear, within 6 weeks of it being started, that there was something seriously wrong and that it needed to be suspended immediately. It is the failure of the Council Leadership to recognise failure earlier, and their decision two weeks ago to block an independent inquiry into what went wrong, which should lead to resignations. Oaklands Resident
  • Score: -127

8:42am Sat 12 Jul 14

julia brica says...

pedalling paul wrote:
JasBro wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
Sadly every political group tries to present itself as the motorists friend when elections are on the horizon. But none of then can ever deliver a car users paradise..
About time there was cross party consensus on this, and a willingness to publicly adhere to the overarching goal of our Local Transport Plan which sensibly seeks to reduce car dependancy further. Perhaps York's recently announced further grant from Govt's Local Sustainable Transport Fund will aid that process.
Nobody has asked for a car user's paradise, nobody expects a car user's paradise and I think people are heartily sick of your glib cliches and over simplifications .

The fact is that the policies you support have created more congestion and more pollution over the last decade, for the same amount of traffic.

Getting back to the topic in hand. The fines should have been paid back as soon as they were declared illegal, and people should not have to request a repayment, it should be done automatically.
"The same amount of traffic" is a direct consequence of the past policies of Local Transport Plans 1 & 2, to restrain increases in car use. Without that, York would already be experiencing the gridlock that LTP3 now seeks to address.The successful consequence has been stabilisation of peak car use levels since 2006.
But York cannot afford to relax on its laurels. It is expected that there will be a significant growth in jobs and housing over the next 15 - 20 years. The make up of York's population will also change over this period, with more older and dependent people expected to be living in the city. This will increase the pressures on the transport network, which could lead to current levels of delay increasing contributing to more emissions of greenhouse gases and pollutants that affect air quality in some areas of the city.
Whichever party we elect to lead from 2015 will have to seriously support LTP3, to head off the long term threat posed by greater car use levels. I hope that the planned Congestion Commission will achieve this.
This strategy is intended to benefit those who need to use a motor vehicle rather than those who want to.
Try looking beyond the next elections, and beyond your lifetime.
Try looking beyond your handlebars Paul and wobble off into the dream world you live in.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JasBro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: Sadly every political group tries to present itself as the motorists friend when elections are on the horizon. But none of then can ever deliver a car users paradise.. About time there was cross party consensus on this, and a willingness to publicly adhere to the overarching goal of our Local Transport Plan which sensibly seeks to reduce car dependancy further. Perhaps York's recently announced further grant from Govt's Local Sustainable Transport Fund will aid that process.[/p][/quote]Nobody has asked for a car user's paradise, nobody expects a car user's paradise and I think people are heartily sick of your glib cliches and over simplifications . The fact is that the policies you support have created more congestion and more pollution over the last decade, for the same amount of traffic. Getting back to the topic in hand. The fines should have been paid back as soon as they were declared illegal, and people should not have to request a repayment, it should be done automatically.[/p][/quote]"The same amount of traffic" is a direct consequence of the past policies of Local Transport Plans 1 & 2, to restrain increases in car use. Without that, York would already be experiencing the gridlock that LTP3 now seeks to address.The successful consequence has been stabilisation of peak car use levels since 2006. But York cannot afford to relax on its laurels. It is expected that there will be a significant growth in jobs and housing over the next 15 - 20 years. The make up of York's population will also change over this period, with more older and dependent people expected to be living in the city. This will increase the pressures on the transport network, which could lead to current levels of delay increasing contributing to more emissions of greenhouse gases and pollutants that affect air quality in some areas of the city. Whichever party we elect to lead from 2015 will have to seriously support LTP3, to head off the long term threat posed by greater car use levels. I hope that the planned Congestion Commission will achieve this. This strategy is intended to benefit those who need to use a motor vehicle rather than those who want to. Try looking beyond the next elections, and beyond your lifetime.[/p][/quote]Try looking beyond your handlebars Paul and wobble off into the dream world you live in. julia brica
  • Score: -224

8:45am Sat 12 Jul 14

piaggio1 says...

Why people who tend to not share your view .do you instantly class as.....right wing ????
What is YOUR problem.
Why people who tend to not share your view .do you instantly class as.....right wing ???? What is YOUR problem. piaggio1
  • Score: -240

8:52am Sat 12 Jul 14

JasBro says...

pedalling paul wrote:
JasBro wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
Sadly every political group tries to present itself as the motorists friend when elections are on the horizon. But none of then can ever deliver a car users paradise..
About time there was cross party consensus on this, and a willingness to publicly adhere to the overarching goal of our Local Transport Plan which sensibly seeks to reduce car dependancy further. Perhaps York's recently announced further grant from Govt's Local Sustainable Transport Fund will aid that process.
Nobody has asked for a car user's paradise, nobody expects a car user's paradise and I think people are heartily sick of your glib cliches and over simplifications .

The fact is that the policies you support have created more congestion and more pollution over the last decade, for the same amount of traffic.

Getting back to the topic in hand. The fines should have been paid back as soon as they were declared illegal, and people should not have to request a repayment, it should be done automatically.
"The same amount of traffic" is a direct consequence of the past policies of Local Transport Plans 1 & 2, to restrain increases in car use. Without that, York would already be experiencing the gridlock that LTP3 now seeks to address.The successful consequence has been stabilisation of peak car use levels since 2006.
But York cannot afford to relax on its laurels. It is expected that there will be a significant growth in jobs and housing over the next 15 - 20 years. The make up of York's population will also change over this period, with more older and dependent people expected to be living in the city. This will increase the pressures on the transport network, which could lead to current levels of delay increasing contributing to more emissions of greenhouse gases and pollutants that affect air quality in some areas of the city.
Whichever party we elect to lead from 2015 will have to seriously support LTP3, to head off the long term threat posed by greater car use levels. I hope that the planned Congestion Commission will achieve this.
This strategy is intended to benefit those who need to use a motor vehicle rather than those who want to.
Try looking beyond the next elections, and beyond your lifetime.
But it's completely and utterly pointless restraining car use if you create more pollution and congestion as a consequence.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JasBro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: Sadly every political group tries to present itself as the motorists friend when elections are on the horizon. But none of then can ever deliver a car users paradise.. About time there was cross party consensus on this, and a willingness to publicly adhere to the overarching goal of our Local Transport Plan which sensibly seeks to reduce car dependancy further. Perhaps York's recently announced further grant from Govt's Local Sustainable Transport Fund will aid that process.[/p][/quote]Nobody has asked for a car user's paradise, nobody expects a car user's paradise and I think people are heartily sick of your glib cliches and over simplifications . The fact is that the policies you support have created more congestion and more pollution over the last decade, for the same amount of traffic. Getting back to the topic in hand. The fines should have been paid back as soon as they were declared illegal, and people should not have to request a repayment, it should be done automatically.[/p][/quote]"The same amount of traffic" is a direct consequence of the past policies of Local Transport Plans 1 & 2, to restrain increases in car use. Without that, York would already be experiencing the gridlock that LTP3 now seeks to address.The successful consequence has been stabilisation of peak car use levels since 2006. But York cannot afford to relax on its laurels. It is expected that there will be a significant growth in jobs and housing over the next 15 - 20 years. The make up of York's population will also change over this period, with more older and dependent people expected to be living in the city. This will increase the pressures on the transport network, which could lead to current levels of delay increasing contributing to more emissions of greenhouse gases and pollutants that affect air quality in some areas of the city. Whichever party we elect to lead from 2015 will have to seriously support LTP3, to head off the long term threat posed by greater car use levels. I hope that the planned Congestion Commission will achieve this. This strategy is intended to benefit those who need to use a motor vehicle rather than those who want to. Try looking beyond the next elections, and beyond your lifetime.[/p][/quote]But it's completely and utterly pointless restraining car use if you create more pollution and congestion as a consequence. JasBro
  • Score: -135

9:01am Sat 12 Jul 14

big boy york says...

so who's going to take the rap for this fiasco then, not JA or DMor even TSL, i can see the fall guys for this now ken king & the others who jumped ship this week
so who's going to take the rap for this fiasco then, not JA or DMor even TSL, i can see the fall guys for this now ken king & the others who jumped ship this week big boy york
  • Score: -132

9:08am Sat 12 Jul 14

The Junkyard Angel says...

Not a legal eagle but wouldn't it have been prudent to 'watertight' that angle before setting the bridge scheme up ? Well done Labour I have voted for you for 30 years , however you have lost my vote now and I wont be returning in a hurry.

Refunding the monies eh ? Bang goes any credibility the Council have. You couldn't make this up , you really couldn't. If this was a private enterprise the rolling of heads would be deafening...
Not a legal eagle but wouldn't it have been prudent to 'watertight' that angle before setting the bridge scheme up ? Well done Labour I have voted for you for 30 years , however you have lost my vote now and I wont be returning in a hurry. Refunding the monies eh ? Bang goes any credibility the Council have. You couldn't make this up , you really couldn't. If this was a private enterprise the rolling of heads would be deafening... The Junkyard Angel
  • Score: -216

9:20am Sat 12 Jul 14

What-a-joke-they-are says...

Alexander should resign!

Merritt should be sacked!

Can we not have a vote /petition of no confidence in this muppetshow!
Alexander should resign! Merritt should be sacked! Can we not have a vote /petition of no confidence in this muppetshow! What-a-joke-they-are
  • Score: -197

9:25am Sat 12 Jul 14

Happytoliveinyork says...

The Junkyard Angel wrote:
Not a legal eagle but wouldn't it have been prudent to 'watertight' that angle before setting the bridge scheme up ? Well done Labour I have voted for you for 30 years , however you have lost my vote now and I wont be returning in a hurry.

Refunding the monies eh ? Bang goes any credibility the Council have. You couldn't make this up , you really couldn't. If this was a private enterprise the rolling of heads would be deafening...
Ditto - have voted labour in every election since I was 18. Goes against the grain but will happily vote against this arrogant bunch come next May.
[quote][p][bold]The Junkyard Angel[/bold] wrote: Not a legal eagle but wouldn't it have been prudent to 'watertight' that angle before setting the bridge scheme up ? Well done Labour I have voted for you for 30 years , however you have lost my vote now and I wont be returning in a hurry. Refunding the monies eh ? Bang goes any credibility the Council have. You couldn't make this up , you really couldn't. If this was a private enterprise the rolling of heads would be deafening...[/p][/quote]Ditto - have voted labour in every election since I was 18. Goes against the grain but will happily vote against this arrogant bunch come next May. Happytoliveinyork
  • Score: -150

9:35am Sat 12 Jul 14

CaroleBaines says...

For goodness sake, what a fiasco. Am not into bashing everything the Council does for the sake of it like some on here, but this is just a complete mess and questions need asking. Total incompetence - which is a shame because I think the actual closure was worth trying.
For goodness sake, what a fiasco. Am not into bashing everything the Council does for the sake of it like some on here, but this is just a complete mess and questions need asking. Total incompetence - which is a shame because I think the actual closure was worth trying. CaroleBaines
  • Score: 110

9:35am Sat 12 Jul 14

Well I'll be blowed says...

Note the City Council says motorists will have to make a claim for repayment of their fines. Does the Council intend to contact those fined? if so there should be no need for the victims to make a formal claim. But presumably that is not the case.

As many of those fined were tourists they will be unlikely to find out refunds can be claimed. Hardly a moral way to reverse injustice.
Note the City Council says motorists will have to make a claim for repayment of their fines. Does the Council intend to contact those fined? if so there should be no need for the victims to make a formal claim. But presumably that is not the case. As many of those fined were tourists they will be unlikely to find out refunds can be claimed. Hardly a moral way to reverse injustice. Well I'll be blowed
  • Score: -167

9:38am Sat 12 Jul 14

What-a-joke-they-are says...

So....

All York residents who read the press can have their money back.

All tourists who have vowed never to come back can stay away!

Seems about right - damage still done
So.... All York residents who read the press can have their money back. All tourists who have vowed never to come back can stay away! Seems about right - damage still done What-a-joke-they-are
  • Score: -227

9:47am Sat 12 Jul 14

Jack Ham says...

There will be no resignations.

James Alexander and Kersten England have known this decision would be made for some time. It has been factored into their planning. Notice their recently reduced media profile and cynically timed press release at 6pm on a Friday.

The scheme was an arrogant, politically driven exercise for Labour and CYC to exercise their authority over us. Only in the face of a city wide uprising did they reluctantly, and slowly, back down.

'Oaklands Resident' has talked about the costs involved in making repayments. You can be assured these will rise.

We've had three years of Labour telling us cuts in our services are due to the government. Cuts to vulnerable people, youth services, street repairs. Last year they claimed they couldn't even afford to provide grit in winter.

What we knew then was that these cuts were actually made by choice. A
political choice to channel money into their pet projects, additional cabinet posts and playing with the big boy socialists in West Yorkshire.

That choice has now gone. The costs of a Lendal Bridge will be with us for many years. They will affect us all and mean whoever win next years election face stark choices and less room for democratic decision making.

After bankrupting the UK in 2010 Labour treasury minister Liam Byrne left a note saying "there is no money left". James Alexander's next year might say "We've poured all your money down the drain".

Labour in York were finished last week. This was obvious from the slew of deselections and 'retirements'.

Now is the time for those Labour councillors with a remaining shred of integrity to take a stand. They are there and they need to be brave. Speak out and stand up and be counted.

The watershed has arrived and there's no turning back now. York has reached its lowest point. Resignations must happen this week and they must start at the very top. Kersten England and James Alexander may believe they are irreplaceable but trust me they are not.
There will be no resignations. James Alexander and Kersten England have known this decision would be made for some time. It has been factored into their planning. Notice their recently reduced media profile and cynically timed press release at 6pm on a Friday. The scheme was an arrogant, politically driven exercise for Labour and CYC to exercise their authority over us. Only in the face of a city wide uprising did they reluctantly, and slowly, back down. 'Oaklands Resident' has talked about the costs involved in making repayments. You can be assured these will rise. We've had three years of Labour telling us cuts in our services are due to the government. Cuts to vulnerable people, youth services, street repairs. Last year they claimed they couldn't even afford to provide grit in winter. What we knew then was that these cuts were actually made by choice. A political choice to channel money into their pet projects, additional cabinet posts and playing with the big boy socialists in West Yorkshire. That choice has now gone. The costs of a Lendal Bridge will be with us for many years. They will affect us all and mean whoever win next years election face stark choices and less room for democratic decision making. After bankrupting the UK in 2010 Labour treasury minister Liam Byrne left a note saying "there is no money left". James Alexander's next year might say "We've poured all your money down the drain". Labour in York were finished last week. This was obvious from the slew of deselections and 'retirements'. Now is the time for those Labour councillors with a remaining shred of integrity to take a stand. They are there and they need to be brave. Speak out and stand up and be counted. The watershed has arrived and there's no turning back now. York has reached its lowest point. Resignations must happen this week and they must start at the very top. Kersten England and James Alexander may believe they are irreplaceable but trust me they are not. Jack Ham
  • Score: -123

10:05am Sat 12 Jul 14

Dave Ruddock says...

Excue me They "The Council that took picture evidence" and SENT OUT fines now want those concerned to Contact them to hand back fines etc, what did they do with the evidence, I am not a driver, but think a vast majority caught will ask the same question,
Also the "STATEMENT OF GOODWILL" unlawfully extracting monies, causing permanent Visitor damage, Residents having now to find the penalty notice. The "Good Will" would be look at their records and send refunds, NOT AWAIT People around the World to find out that they are eligible for a refund initially taken under false guidance... MUPPETS CONTINUE .....
Excue me They "The Council that took picture evidence" and SENT OUT fines now want those concerned to Contact them to hand back fines etc, what did they do with the evidence, I am not a driver, but think a vast majority caught will ask the same question, Also the "STATEMENT OF GOODWILL" unlawfully extracting monies, causing permanent Visitor damage, Residents having now to find the penalty notice. The "Good Will" would be look at their records and send refunds, NOT AWAIT People around the World to find out that they are eligible for a refund initially taken under false guidance... MUPPETS CONTINUE ..... Dave Ruddock
  • Score: -115

10:12am Sat 12 Jul 14

mitch2nd says...

They had no choice, so now we should be calling for the Chief Exe of York and every council member involved in this not only stupid but illegal idea to be SACKED, this is going to cost local council tax payers a pretty penny
They had no choice, so now we should be calling for the Chief Exe of York and every council member involved in this not only stupid but illegal idea to be SACKED, this is going to cost local council tax payers a pretty penny mitch2nd
  • Score: -221

10:14am Sat 12 Jul 14

courier46 says...

England ,Alexander and Merritt should resign they are not fit for the job.
How come the huge majority of York people knew how this would end but these couldn`t?. How come the huge majority of York people know that Blanket 20 zones are not for York yet still implemented and how come the majority of York people want these idiots to resign.
England ,Alexander and Merritt should resign they are not fit for the job. How come the huge majority of York people knew how this would end but these couldn`t?. How come the huge majority of York people know that Blanket 20 zones are not for York yet still implemented and how come the majority of York people want these idiots to resign. courier46
  • Score: -205

10:23am Sat 12 Jul 14

courier46 says...

Forgot to say "drawing a line under the matter" "and gesture of goodwill" Let`s say what you mean ,the first comment means -we know we were wrong and want to forget it (we wont) the second we have no choice but to give fines back (we knew you would have to)
Forgot to say "drawing a line under the matter" "and gesture of goodwill" Let`s say what you mean ,the first comment means -we know we were wrong and want to forget it (we wont) the second we have no choice but to give fines back (we knew you would have to) courier46
  • Score: -146

10:25am Sat 12 Jul 14

the-e-man says...

In his post Jack Ham refers to the famous "no money left" note left in The Teasury by Liam Byrne . I have made reference to this in previous posts . It really sums up about all Labour are capable of. They spend public money without any thought of where it will come from. That is why this country is having to go through the painful cuts that we are now experiencing. Merely to get us back to pre Blair/Brown times when we had a sustainable budget.
The Lendal Bridge fiasco has taken Labour's incompetance to a new level. One can only imagine what chaos they would create if let loose on a national basis !!!!!
In his post Jack Ham refers to the famous "no money left" note left in The Teasury by Liam Byrne . I have made reference to this in previous posts . It really sums up about all Labour are capable of. They spend public money without any thought of where it will come from. That is why this country is having to go through the painful cuts that we are now experiencing. Merely to get us back to pre Blair/Brown times when we had a sustainable budget. The Lendal Bridge fiasco has taken Labour's incompetance to a new level. One can only imagine what chaos they would create if let loose on a national basis !!!!! the-e-man
  • Score: -130

10:27am Sat 12 Jul 14

Harry Ballacks says...

Oaklands Resident wrote:
The Councils accounts for the last financial year reveal that it took £1.8 million in ANPR camera fine income on Lendal and Coppergate.

However it spent over £700,000 administering the schemes. To this must be added the costs of the "appeal"

So it has £1 million available for refunds. Hence the decision to pay out only on Lendal Bridge.

However they have no idea how much the administrative costs of the refund exercise will be and, if the traffic adjudicators final judgement on Coppergate comes down against the Council, then taxpayers will have to stump up the difference.

There may be room for two viewpoints on whether this trial was justified in the first place but it was clear, within 6 weeks of it being started, that there was something seriously wrong and that it needed to be suspended immediately.

It is the failure of the Council Leadership to recognise failure earlier, and their decision two weeks ago to block an independent inquiry into what went wrong, which should lead to resignations.
The council tax payers WILL have to stump up the difference!! I understand that a private company was hired to administer the pet project, their payment being a proportion of all fines! They've now done the job they were paid to do, so they're not got going to pay back their 'salary' just because it's all gone t**s up!!! Therefore, knock off up to half the income from fines before you start, then knock off the cost of setting the trial up in the first place & that'll be how much is left to pay back fines. Not a lot by my calculations!! By asking people to apply for a refund, they live in hope that over half won't!
I struggle to believe that no one has resigned or been sacked over this one!
[quote][p][bold]Oaklands Resident[/bold] wrote: The Councils accounts for the last financial year reveal that it took £1.8 million in ANPR camera fine income on Lendal and Coppergate. However it spent over £700,000 administering the schemes. To this must be added the costs of the "appeal" So it has £1 million available for refunds. Hence the decision to pay out only on Lendal Bridge. However they have no idea how much the administrative costs of the refund exercise will be and, if the traffic adjudicators final judgement on Coppergate comes down against the Council, then taxpayers will have to stump up the difference. There may be room for two viewpoints on whether this trial was justified in the first place but it was clear, within 6 weeks of it being started, that there was something seriously wrong and that it needed to be suspended immediately. It is the failure of the Council Leadership to recognise failure earlier, and their decision two weeks ago to block an independent inquiry into what went wrong, which should lead to resignations.[/p][/quote]The council tax payers WILL have to stump up the difference!! I understand that a private company was hired to administer the pet project, their payment being a proportion of all fines! They've now done the job they were paid to do, so they're not got going to pay back their 'salary' just because it's all gone t**s up!!! Therefore, knock off up to half the income from fines before you start, then knock off the cost of setting the trial up in the first place & that'll be how much is left to pay back fines. Not a lot by my calculations!! By asking people to apply for a refund, they live in hope that over half won't! I struggle to believe that no one has resigned or been sacked over this one! Harry Ballacks
  • Score: -215

10:29am Sat 12 Jul 14

holden79 says...

All very good for local residents who might have kept their penalty notices and hear about the refunds, but what about the (presumably many) thousands of hire car tourists that will have been fined via their credit card deposit with the hire firm? Usually the hire firm gets the penalty notice, they charge the customers' credit card and add an admin fee. They won't refund the admin fee to the customer even if they get the money back from CoYC to somehow refund the customers' credit card.......... Total fiasco!!!!!! It still alienates thousands of tourists who just won't know a refund is possible !!!!
All very good for local residents who might have kept their penalty notices and hear about the refunds, but what about the (presumably many) thousands of hire car tourists that will have been fined via their credit card deposit with the hire firm? Usually the hire firm gets the penalty notice, they charge the customers' credit card and add an admin fee. They won't refund the admin fee to the customer even if they get the money back from CoYC to somehow refund the customers' credit card.......... Total fiasco!!!!!! It still alienates thousands of tourists who just won't know a refund is possible !!!! holden79
  • Score: -201

10:44am Sat 12 Jul 14

powerwatt says...

Prior Planning and Preparation Prevents **** Poor Performance.

An ethos not done by the council.

If the first thing you looked at was 'am I breaking the law?' Then this wouldn't have happened.

It's like a burglar breaking into a house, bring caught then saying sorry I didn't realise it was illegal. I'll give back anyone who asks for anything
Prior Planning and Preparation Prevents **** Poor Performance. An ethos not done by the council. If the first thing you looked at was 'am I breaking the law?' Then this wouldn't have happened. It's like a burglar breaking into a house, bring caught then saying sorry I didn't realise it was illegal. I'll give back anyone who asks for anything powerwatt
  • Score: -117

10:46am Sat 12 Jul 14

RingoStarr says...

"Cllr James Alexander said about the decision: “Councillors from all parties have told me that they want to move on, and they are right. It is for this reason, to draw the matter to a close and as a gesture of goodwill, that we make this announcement today".
Translation: We made a complete **** up.
"Cllr James Alexander said about the decision: “Councillors from all parties have told me that they want to move on, and they are right. It is for this reason, to draw the matter to a close and as a gesture of goodwill, that we make this announcement today". Translation: We made a complete **** up. RingoStarr
  • Score: -108

10:49am Sat 12 Jul 14

oracale1 says...

Outraged
Everything Labour touch is a disaster roll on next May when we will have our say.
Outraged Everything Labour touch is a disaster roll on next May when we will have our say. oracale1
  • Score: -201

10:51am Sat 12 Jul 14

Happytoliveinyork says...

courier46 wrote:
England ,Alexander and Merritt should resign they are not fit for the job.
How come the huge majority of York people knew how this would end but these couldn`t?. How come the huge majority of York people know that Blanket 20 zones are not for York yet still implemented and how come the majority of York people want these idiots to resign.
Agree 100%
[quote][p][bold]courier46[/bold] wrote: England ,Alexander and Merritt should resign they are not fit for the job. How come the huge majority of York people knew how this would end but these couldn`t?. How come the huge majority of York people know that Blanket 20 zones are not for York yet still implemented and how come the majority of York people want these idiots to resign.[/p][/quote]Agree 100% Happytoliveinyork
  • Score: -201

10:52am Sat 12 Jul 14

oldgoat says...

pedalling paul wrote:
Sadly every political group tries to present itself as the motorists friend when elections are on the horizon. But none of then can ever deliver a car users paradise..
About time there was cross party consensus on this, and a willingness to publicly adhere to the overarching goal of our Local Transport Plan which sensibly seeks to reduce car dependancy further. Perhaps York's recently announced further grant from Govt's Local Sustainable Transport Fund will aid that process.
This is nothing to do with being the motorist's friend. Please don't go driving wedges where we don't need them.

All road users need equal consideration. Blocking major roads through town to try and force some road users away is not going to work. Footstreets work because everyone is banned. Coppergate is a foolish implementation as it was fine before the random time extension.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: Sadly every political group tries to present itself as the motorists friend when elections are on the horizon. But none of then can ever deliver a car users paradise.. About time there was cross party consensus on this, and a willingness to publicly adhere to the overarching goal of our Local Transport Plan which sensibly seeks to reduce car dependancy further. Perhaps York's recently announced further grant from Govt's Local Sustainable Transport Fund will aid that process.[/p][/quote]This is nothing to do with being the motorist's friend. Please don't go driving wedges where we don't need them. All road users need equal consideration. Blocking major roads through town to try and force some road users away is not going to work. Footstreets work because everyone is banned. Coppergate is a foolish implementation as it was fine before the random time extension. oldgoat
  • Score: -134

10:52am Sat 12 Jul 14

Happytoliveinyork says...

Jack Ham wrote:
There will be no resignations.

James Alexander and Kersten England have known this decision would be made for some time. It has been factored into their planning. Notice their recently reduced media profile and cynically timed press release at 6pm on a Friday.

The scheme was an arrogant, politically driven exercise for Labour and CYC to exercise their authority over us. Only in the face of a city wide uprising did they reluctantly, and slowly, back down.

'Oaklands Resident' has talked about the costs involved in making repayments. You can be assured these will rise.

We've had three years of Labour telling us cuts in our services are due to the government. Cuts to vulnerable people, youth services, street repairs. Last year they claimed they couldn't even afford to provide grit in winter.

What we knew then was that these cuts were actually made by choice. A
political choice to channel money into their pet projects, additional cabinet posts and playing with the big boy socialists in West Yorkshire.

That choice has now gone. The costs of a Lendal Bridge will be with us for many years. They will affect us all and mean whoever win next years election face stark choices and less room for democratic decision making.

After bankrupting the UK in 2010 Labour treasury minister Liam Byrne left a note saying "there is no money left". James Alexander's next year might say "We've poured all your money down the drain".

Labour in York were finished last week. This was obvious from the slew of deselections and 'retirements'.

Now is the time for those Labour councillors with a remaining shred of integrity to take a stand. They are there and they need to be brave. Speak out and stand up and be counted.

The watershed has arrived and there's no turning back now. York has reached its lowest point. Resignations must happen this week and they must start at the very top. Kersten England and James Alexander may believe they are irreplaceable but trust me they are not.
England & Alexander out - how do we go about starting a petition ?
[quote][p][bold]Jack Ham[/bold] wrote: There will be no resignations. James Alexander and Kersten England have known this decision would be made for some time. It has been factored into their planning. Notice their recently reduced media profile and cynically timed press release at 6pm on a Friday. The scheme was an arrogant, politically driven exercise for Labour and CYC to exercise their authority over us. Only in the face of a city wide uprising did they reluctantly, and slowly, back down. 'Oaklands Resident' has talked about the costs involved in making repayments. You can be assured these will rise. We've had three years of Labour telling us cuts in our services are due to the government. Cuts to vulnerable people, youth services, street repairs. Last year they claimed they couldn't even afford to provide grit in winter. What we knew then was that these cuts were actually made by choice. A political choice to channel money into their pet projects, additional cabinet posts and playing with the big boy socialists in West Yorkshire. That choice has now gone. The costs of a Lendal Bridge will be with us for many years. They will affect us all and mean whoever win next years election face stark choices and less room for democratic decision making. After bankrupting the UK in 2010 Labour treasury minister Liam Byrne left a note saying "there is no money left". James Alexander's next year might say "We've poured all your money down the drain". Labour in York were finished last week. This was obvious from the slew of deselections and 'retirements'. Now is the time for those Labour councillors with a remaining shred of integrity to take a stand. They are there and they need to be brave. Speak out and stand up and be counted. The watershed has arrived and there's no turning back now. York has reached its lowest point. Resignations must happen this week and they must start at the very top. Kersten England and James Alexander may believe they are irreplaceable but trust me they are not.[/p][/quote]England & Alexander out - how do we go about starting a petition ? Happytoliveinyork
  • Score: -123

11:05am Sat 12 Jul 14

Back and Beyond says...

The Council should contact all those affected and make the necessary arrangements to refund them, they are just playing on the fact that the majority fined are visitors to the City who will now not be aware of this decision.
If I I was one of those affected I would be placing an administration charge for time spent paying and reclaiming the money.

From start to finish it's been shambles.......
The Council should contact all those affected and make the necessary arrangements to refund them, they are just playing on the fact that the majority fined are visitors to the City who will now not be aware of this decision. If I I was one of those affected I would be placing an administration charge for time spent paying and reclaiming the money. From start to finish it's been shambles....... Back and Beyond
  • Score: -221

11:18am Sat 12 Jul 14

Got a life says...

What an amazing amount of negative scores! Funny that they all seem to be against the negative comments relating to this totally incompetent council.

Its best not to forget that it was not only Alexander but his bunch of idiots who should be subject to a vote of no confidence and be forced out of office. If I ran my business like these fools I'd have no business!

Go on Alexander as a "goodwill gesture" RESIGN
What an amazing amount of negative scores! Funny that they all seem to be against the negative comments relating to this totally incompetent council. Its best not to forget that it was not only Alexander but his bunch of idiots who should be subject to a vote of no confidence and be forced out of office. If I ran my business like these fools I'd have no business! Go on Alexander as a "goodwill gesture" RESIGN Got a life
  • Score: -206

11:21am Sat 12 Jul 14

Warren Z says...

Has the council employed a team of refund management consultants.£700 a day per person should cover it.
Has the council employed a team of refund management consultants.£700 a day per person should cover it. Warren Z
  • Score: -142

11:52am Sat 12 Jul 14

Jack Ham says...

Warren Z wrote:
Has the council employed a team of refund management consultants.£700 a day per person should cover it.
You joke but with no internal capacity CYC will be forced to outsource this work, at commercial rates or bring in expensive temporary staff to do the work.

Either way, we pay.

Whilst Kersten England continues to draw her £137500.00 annual salary, along with generous pension and James Alexander his £30,000 in allowances for being our 'leader'.
[quote][p][bold]Warren Z[/bold] wrote: Has the council employed a team of refund management consultants.£700 a day per person should cover it.[/p][/quote]You joke but with no internal capacity CYC will be forced to outsource this work, at commercial rates or bring in expensive temporary staff to do the work. Either way, we pay. Whilst Kersten England continues to draw her £137500.00 annual salary, along with generous pension and James Alexander his £30,000 in allowances for being our 'leader'. Jack Ham
  • Score: -137

12:02pm Sat 12 Jul 14

Pinza-C55 says...

Since the majority of those fined were from outside York, unless this goes to the national press it is unlikely that the council will have refund more than a quarter of those fined, or less.
Since the majority of those fined were from outside York, unless this goes to the national press it is unlikely that the council will have refund more than a quarter of those fined, or less. Pinza-C55
  • Score: -224

12:09pm Sat 12 Jul 14

pedalling paul says...

Meanwhile the bus which offers a highly efficient use of road capacity, is being forced by private car users to travel at their speed.......except of course where bus priority measures have sensibly been created. Now it's back to a low grind over Lendal Bridge, and less competitive journey times which will not tempt some residents out of cars. A bit chicken and eggish isn't .
Meanwhile the bus which offers a highly efficient use of road capacity, is being forced by private car users to travel at their speed.......except of course where bus priority measures have sensibly been created. Now it's back to a low grind over Lendal Bridge, and less competitive journey times which will not tempt some residents out of cars. A bit chicken and eggish isn't . pedalling paul
  • Score: 190

12:25pm Sat 12 Jul 14

Ousetunes says...

Funny isn't it?

The 'fine' (demanding money with menaces) found its way to your door, no problem and yet if you want to act upon the kindness of Alexander's wonderful 'goodwill gesture', you have to apply personally!

Well, not only would I be seeking my money back, but I'd be asking for interest to be added and another £500 for the sheer inconvenience and slurring of one's reputation.

Finally, howsabout a victim surcharge for everyone who received a 'fine'? Add another £80.

Turn the lights out on your way out Alexander.....
Funny isn't it? The 'fine' (demanding money with menaces) found its way to your door, no problem and yet if you want to act upon the kindness of Alexander's wonderful 'goodwill gesture', you have to apply personally! Well, not only would I be seeking my money back, but I'd be asking for interest to be added and another £500 for the sheer inconvenience and slurring of one's reputation. Finally, howsabout a victim surcharge for everyone who received a 'fine'? Add another £80. Turn the lights out on your way out Alexander..... Ousetunes
  • Score: -129

12:26pm Sat 12 Jul 14

eeoodares says...

pedalling paul wrote:
JasBro wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
Sadly every political group tries to present itself as the motorists friend when elections are on the horizon. But none of then can ever deliver a car users paradise..
About time there was cross party consensus on this, and a willingness to publicly adhere to the overarching goal of our Local Transport Plan which sensibly seeks to reduce car dependancy further. Perhaps York's recently announced further grant from Govt's Local Sustainable Transport Fund will aid that process.
Nobody has asked for a car user's paradise, nobody expects a car user's paradise and I think people are heartily sick of your glib cliches and over simplifications .

The fact is that the policies you support have created more congestion and more pollution over the last decade, for the same amount of traffic.

Getting back to the topic in hand. The fines should have been paid back as soon as they were declared illegal, and people should not have to request a repayment, it should be done automatically.
"The same amount of traffic" is a direct consequence of the past policies of Local Transport Plans 1 & 2, to restrain increases in car use. Without that, York would already be experiencing the gridlock that LTP3 now seeks to address.The successful consequence has been stabilisation of peak car use levels since 2006.
But York cannot afford to relax on its laurels. It is expected that there will be a significant growth in jobs and housing over the next 15 - 20 years. The make up of York's population will also change over this period, with more older and dependent people expected to be living in the city. This will increase the pressures on the transport network, which could lead to current levels of delay increasing contributing to more emissions of greenhouse gases and pollutants that affect air quality in some areas of the city.
Whichever party we elect to lead from 2015 will have to seriously support LTP3, to head off the long term threat posed by greater car use levels. I hope that the planned Congestion Commission will achieve this.
This strategy is intended to benefit those who need to use a motor vehicle rather than those who want to.
Try looking beyond the next elections, and beyond your lifetime.
Why does it take longer now to drive across town, why is there more pollution for less car journeys made???? Because of your policies! Cretin.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JasBro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: Sadly every political group tries to present itself as the motorists friend when elections are on the horizon. But none of then can ever deliver a car users paradise.. About time there was cross party consensus on this, and a willingness to publicly adhere to the overarching goal of our Local Transport Plan which sensibly seeks to reduce car dependancy further. Perhaps York's recently announced further grant from Govt's Local Sustainable Transport Fund will aid that process.[/p][/quote]Nobody has asked for a car user's paradise, nobody expects a car user's paradise and I think people are heartily sick of your glib cliches and over simplifications . The fact is that the policies you support have created more congestion and more pollution over the last decade, for the same amount of traffic. Getting back to the topic in hand. The fines should have been paid back as soon as they were declared illegal, and people should not have to request a repayment, it should be done automatically.[/p][/quote]"The same amount of traffic" is a direct consequence of the past policies of Local Transport Plans 1 & 2, to restrain increases in car use. Without that, York would already be experiencing the gridlock that LTP3 now seeks to address.The successful consequence has been stabilisation of peak car use levels since 2006. But York cannot afford to relax on its laurels. It is expected that there will be a significant growth in jobs and housing over the next 15 - 20 years. The make up of York's population will also change over this period, with more older and dependent people expected to be living in the city. This will increase the pressures on the transport network, which could lead to current levels of delay increasing contributing to more emissions of greenhouse gases and pollutants that affect air quality in some areas of the city. Whichever party we elect to lead from 2015 will have to seriously support LTP3, to head off the long term threat posed by greater car use levels. I hope that the planned Congestion Commission will achieve this. This strategy is intended to benefit those who need to use a motor vehicle rather than those who want to. Try looking beyond the next elections, and beyond your lifetime.[/p][/quote]Why does it take longer now to drive across town, why is there more pollution for less car journeys made???? Because of your policies! Cretin. eeoodares
  • Score: -124

12:53pm Sat 12 Jul 14

Jack Ham says...

No sign of Sonja Bloodaxe Crisp on here yet. Must be awaiting instructions.
No sign of Sonja Bloodaxe Crisp on here yet. Must be awaiting instructions. Jack Ham
  • Score: -228

2:26pm Sat 12 Jul 14

MorkofYork says...

What a farce. There's no good will, only self preservation, they made a horrible job of it all.
Don't forget all the abuse the people who were fined got from the anti motorists, most of them visitors bringing wealth into the city.
What a farce. There's no good will, only self preservation, they made a horrible job of it all. Don't forget all the abuse the people who were fined got from the anti motorists, most of them visitors bringing wealth into the city. MorkofYork
  • Score: -246

2:47pm Sat 12 Jul 14

MorkofYork says...

It's really time we took a different direction on car usage. Everything that's been put in under the guise of safety is all about discrimination. All these 20mph zones and speed humps everywhere. Lights and priority measures intended to hold cars up, bus laybys removed for the same aim.

None of these things solve anything and we're burdened with the problems they create.
It's really time we took a different direction on car usage. Everything that's been put in under the guise of safety is all about discrimination. All these 20mph zones and speed humps everywhere. Lights and priority measures intended to hold cars up, bus laybys removed for the same aim. None of these things solve anything and we're burdened with the problems they create. MorkofYork
  • Score: -151

3:31pm Sat 12 Jul 14

MUDAHIM says...

Are they going to refund the added costs incurred by all those people who obeyed the closures and detoured?
Are they going to refund the added costs incurred by all those people who obeyed the closures and detoured? MUDAHIM
  • Score: -104

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