Council spends £11k on Lendal Bridge legal advice

Council spends £11k on Lendal Bridge legal advice

Council spends £11k on Lendal Bridge legal advice

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

TOP bosses at the city council have spent £11,000 on lawyers fighting a legal battle over the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate closures.

Lawyers' advice has cost the council £11,330 in under four months, according to figures obtained by political opponents who have criticised what they call a waste of taxpayers money.

The Liberal Democrat group on City of York Council obtained the figures from senior officials, after asking how much the council had spent contesting a ruling by the traffic adjudicator on both Lendal Bridge and Coppergate, issued in early April.

They have condemned the spending as a waste of money now the appeal over Lendal Bridge has been dropped. Their criticisms have been rubbished by the Labour group who said it was irresponsible to suggest CYC ought not to have consulted legal experts.

Cllr Keith Aspden, Liberal Democrat group leader, said: “It is deeply concerning that Labour is spending taxpayers’ money in this way. The legal challenge has been costing taxpayers’ £700 a week since the process began at the start of April. We already know that a lot of this has been completely wasted as Labour has dropped its appeal over the botched Lendal Bridge trial and agreed to repay the motorists fined.

“In April the Labour Council said they were confident of winning the Lendal Bridge appeal. Last week they abruptly dropped the challenge after a behind-closed-doors meeting. I have asked for an explanation as to what changed and what legal advice was given between April and July. The public has a right to know."

The legal appeal began after a ruling by a traffic adjudicator that the process City of York Council had used to enforce the traffic ban and issue fine on both Lendal Bridge and Coppergate had been unlawful. But earlier this month, the council announced it was dropping the Lendal Bridge appeal and would offer refunds to drivers fined on the bridge.

A Labour spokesman added: ""York Liberal Democrats arguing the council should not seek legal advice is irresponsible.

“It is also hypocritical for York Liberal Democrats to argue about waste when they wasted millions on Hungate and still left it derelict, the purple FTR buses, the proposal for another council office in Acomb and more.

“We hope they engage in the cross-party congestion commission and work in partnership to find solutions to York's congestion problems that will not go away. Arguing consistently for the status quo is not an option”.

Comments (49)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:33pm Fri 25 Jul 14

vax2002 says...

They dropped nothing, they ran out of time to file for judicial review.
They dropped nothing, they ran out of time to file for judicial review. vax2002
  • Score: 21

12:36pm Fri 25 Jul 14

ouseswimmer says...

Clearly the legal advice thus far has been shockingly poor. Are we now due a rebate for this?
Clearly the legal advice thus far has been shockingly poor. Are we now due a rebate for this? ouseswimmer
  • Score: 31

12:48pm Fri 25 Jul 14

bolero says...

It is worrying that there is not going to be a party worth voting for at the next council elections. The Lib Dems must think we have very short memories. They wasted millions of pounds of taxpayers money with their ill fated schemes. I'm afraid you still have a price to pay. The Tories are very critical but what have they to offer in place of labours money wasting hare brained schemes. Let's hear your solutions to York's congestion problems for a start. We obviously need a new outlook from people of integrity, honesty and backbone. And no, I am not advocating Green. Goodness only knows where our money would go if they got the chance.
It is worrying that there is not going to be a party worth voting for at the next council elections. The Lib Dems must think we have very short memories. They wasted millions of pounds of taxpayers money with their ill fated schemes. I'm afraid you still have a price to pay. The Tories are very critical but what have they to offer in place of labours money wasting hare brained schemes. Let's hear your solutions to York's congestion problems for a start. We obviously need a new outlook from people of integrity, honesty and backbone. And no, I am not advocating Green. Goodness only knows where our money would go if they got the chance. bolero
  • Score: 41

1:00pm Fri 25 Jul 14

Cheeky face says...

Legal opinion is easy;but should not cost that amount. It is unlikely that the review would reverse the adjudicator's decision of Feb 2014 ; as they are motoring law/ signs experts. Judicial review could be £30k easily, but the council have missed the boat on that.

Coppergate is now PCN free and was handled/administered worse than Coppergate. Bill Wooley of the council and the police knew Coppergate signs were wrong years ago; and they are still wrongly positioned. In fact a sign at Cumberland St/Clifford St junction is not necessary and confusing! So what are they spending on advice re Coppergate? Traffic enforcement page on the Council web site now only quoting Coppergate says "bus lane" which is wrong; and also alternative signs will provide prohibited motorists alternative routes. I am still awaiting answers on this last point despite e-mail to council leader in Feb 2014!
Legal opinion is easy;but should not cost that amount. It is unlikely that the review would reverse the adjudicator's decision of Feb 2014 ; as they are motoring law/ signs experts. Judicial review could be £30k easily, but the council have missed the boat on that. Coppergate is now PCN free and was handled/administered worse than Coppergate. Bill Wooley of the council and the police knew Coppergate signs were wrong years ago; and they are still wrongly positioned. In fact a sign at Cumberland St/Clifford St junction is not necessary and confusing! So what are they spending on advice re Coppergate? Traffic enforcement page on the Council web site now only quoting Coppergate says "bus lane" which is wrong; and also alternative signs will provide prohibited motorists alternative routes. I am still awaiting answers on this last point despite e-mail to council leader in Feb 2014! Cheeky face
  • Score: 13

1:08pm Fri 25 Jul 14

the original Homer says...

We shouldn't criticise them for taking legal advice. That is one of the few things they have done right.

Presumably they were told that an appeal was pointless, as stated on this website several times.

It would be interesting to know if they paid for any earlier advice which turned out to be wrong though.

In fairness, I would expect any council of any political flavour to consult external legal experts when required, and £11k over 4 months is much cheaper than employing one.
We shouldn't criticise them for taking legal advice. That is one of the few things they have done right. Presumably they were told that an appeal was pointless, as stated on this website several times. It would be interesting to know if they paid for any earlier advice which turned out to be wrong though. In fairness, I would expect any council of any political flavour to consult external legal experts when required, and £11k over 4 months is much cheaper than employing one. the original Homer
  • Score: -4

1:19pm Fri 25 Jul 14

meme says...

“It is also hypocritical for York Liberal Democrats to argue about waste when they wasted millions on Hungate and still left it derelict, the purple FTR buses, the proposal for another council office in Acomb and more.
so that's a great argument then...just because the Libs were terrible means they should not criticise Labour for being terrible! What is the world coming too.
I'm not at fault because they were worse is hardly a defence!
But its a sign of the times as to how defensive this lot have becomne
“It is also hypocritical for York Liberal Democrats to argue about waste when they wasted millions on Hungate and still left it derelict, the purple FTR buses, the proposal for another council office in Acomb and more. so that's a great argument then...just because the Libs were terrible means they should not criticise Labour for being terrible! What is the world coming too. I'm not at fault because they were worse is hardly a defence! But its a sign of the times as to how defensive this lot have becomne meme
  • Score: 23

1:45pm Fri 25 Jul 14

TheMinsterMen says...

the original Homer wrote:
We shouldn't criticise them for taking legal advice. That is one of the few things they have done right.

Presumably they were told that an appeal was pointless, as stated on this website several times.

It would be interesting to know if they paid for any earlier advice which turned out to be wrong though.

In fairness, I would expect any council of any political flavour to consult external legal experts when required, and £11k over 4 months is much cheaper than employing one.
I'm surprised that your post has been downrated, it's perfectly logical reasoning - why wouldn't legal advice be sought on a legal matter. We can critise the cost, but is that not more of an issue with the choice of solicitor and even so gaining external expert advice does cost a significant amount, as anyone involved in business knows.

I was no supporter of the bridge trial by any means, or this labour council. But perhaps if this money was spent prior to the trial to establish the legal position, they wouldn't have started it at all.
[quote][p][bold]the original Homer[/bold] wrote: We shouldn't criticise them for taking legal advice. That is one of the few things they have done right. Presumably they were told that an appeal was pointless, as stated on this website several times. It would be interesting to know if they paid for any earlier advice which turned out to be wrong though. In fairness, I would expect any council of any political flavour to consult external legal experts when required, and £11k over 4 months is much cheaper than employing one.[/p][/quote]I'm surprised that your post has been downrated, it's perfectly logical reasoning - why wouldn't legal advice be sought on a legal matter. We can critise the cost, but is that not more of an issue with the choice of solicitor and even so gaining external expert advice does cost a significant amount, as anyone involved in business knows. I was no supporter of the bridge trial by any means, or this labour council. But perhaps if this money was spent prior to the trial to establish the legal position, they wouldn't have started it at all. TheMinsterMen
  • Score: 20

2:13pm Fri 25 Jul 14

walpole says...

In the oxford dictionary, the word " incompetence "is described as,
bungled, inadequate, inept, inexpert, unacceptable, unsatisfactory, unskilful, useless, hopeless, incapable, ineffective, inefficient, maladroit, unfit, unqualified, untrained......
Following the Lendal fiasco , I wonder how many of these definitions apply to the present council....
In the oxford dictionary, the word " incompetence "is described as, bungled, inadequate, inept, inexpert, unacceptable, unsatisfactory, unskilful, useless, hopeless, incapable, ineffective, inefficient, maladroit, unfit, unqualified, untrained...... Following the Lendal fiasco , I wonder how many of these definitions apply to the present council.... walpole
  • Score: 26

2:18pm Fri 25 Jul 14

tobefair says...

How can York have a congestion problem when, outside rush hour traffic it is quicker to drive through town than to go round the northern ring-road?
How can York have a congestion problem when, outside rush hour traffic it is quicker to drive through town than to go round the northern ring-road? tobefair
  • Score: 41

2:25pm Fri 25 Jul 14

meme says...

Anyway despite the anti car lobbys comments and ranting about car Armageddon I don't think York has much of a traffic issue anyway. its a pretty good city to drive around most of the time
Anyway despite the anti car lobbys comments and ranting about car Armageddon I don't think York has much of a traffic issue anyway. its a pretty good city to drive around most of the time [I am a car, motorcycle and bicycle rider and regularly use all 3 but not at once!] meme
  • Score: 30

2:42pm Fri 25 Jul 14

yorkandproud says...

tobefair wrote:
How can York have a congestion problem when, outside rush hour traffic it is quicker to drive through town than to go round the northern ring-road?
Totally agree. You won't believe me, but the traffic in the Bootham area is no worse than it was over 10 years ago. I live there, and my travelling times are no different, except late afternoon, when the most traffic is caused by the school run from St Peters School. Don't listen to pedalling paul , and other scaremongers. Of course, they have their ideas, and they are entitled to them, but to be honest , this council spend far too much time worrying about traffic , when they should be thinking about Schools, social care, street cleaning, and generally tidying the place up. The grass on the bar walls has been a disgrace this year.
[quote][p][bold]tobefair[/bold] wrote: How can York have a congestion problem when, outside rush hour traffic it is quicker to drive through town than to go round the northern ring-road?[/p][/quote]Totally agree. You won't believe me, but the traffic in the Bootham area is no worse than it was over 10 years ago. I live there, and my travelling times are no different, except late afternoon, when the most traffic is caused by the school run from St Peters School. Don't listen to pedalling paul , and other scaremongers. Of course, they have their ideas, and they are entitled to them, but to be honest , this council spend far too much time worrying about traffic , when they should be thinking about Schools, social care, street cleaning, and generally tidying the place up. The grass on the bar walls has been a disgrace this year. yorkandproud
  • Score: 36

2:58pm Fri 25 Jul 14

tizme says...

So how do I go about requesting the return of my Coppergate fine?
So how do I go about requesting the return of my Coppergate fine? tizme
  • Score: 11

3:22pm Fri 25 Jul 14

LibDem says...

Labour work on the basis that if you repeat half truth often enough, someone will believe them.

So what do we make of "they wasted millions on Hungate and still left it derelict, the purple FTR buses, the proposal for another council office in Acomb"

There was abortive expenditure on architect’s fees at the proposed Council office site in Hungate as a result of English Heritage opposing the development very much at the last minute. However the site was not left derelict.

The Haymarket car park was bringing in over £300,000 to the Council each year with the opportunity to extend it onto the old ambulance station site and increase the revenue still further.

The biggest mistake as made by the new Labour administration which closed the car park and sold the prime site off for only £2 million in the depths of the recession.

That’s less than half its current value.

They also failed to secure a condition on the sale which would have allowed the taxpayers to share in any increased value in the site prior to development.

Ironically, the site is currently derelict.

The LibDem Council did not spend a penny on the "Purple Bus" as Labour term the FTR.

The Council did invest in bus stops and road resurfacing on the number 4 bus route - improvements which continue to benefit bus passengers and other road users.

The last Council did not propose “another Council office in Acomb”.

It planned to replace the Council office on York Road/Carr Lane with a facility at the Acomb Explore Library on Front Street (effectively establishing a one stop shop for what is York’s largest sub-urb).

When Labour took office they simply closed the Acomb office - a decision which has contibuted to the decline in the prosperity of the Acomb commercial and retail area.

Finally Labour announced on TV two weeks ago that they would be refunding Lendal Bridge fines and withdrawing their appeal against the traffic adjudicator’s judgement.

Although it hasn’t received much publicity, they later admitted that no such decision had been made and that a meeting needed to be scheduled before any refunds could take place.

No such meeting has been scheduled.
Labour work on the basis that if you repeat half truth often enough, someone will believe them. So what do we make of "they wasted millions on Hungate and still left it derelict, the purple FTR buses, the proposal for another council office in Acomb" There was abortive expenditure on architect’s fees at the proposed Council office site in Hungate as a result of English Heritage opposing the development very much at the last minute. However the site was not left derelict. The Haymarket car park was bringing in over £300,000 to the Council each year with the opportunity to extend it onto the old ambulance station site and increase the revenue still further. The biggest mistake as made by the new Labour administration which closed the car park and sold the prime site off for only £2 million in the depths of the recession. That’s less than half its current value. They also failed to secure a condition on the sale which would have allowed the taxpayers to share in any increased value in the site prior to development. Ironically, the site is currently derelict. The LibDem Council did not spend a penny on the "Purple Bus" as Labour term the FTR. The Council did invest in bus stops and road resurfacing on the number 4 bus route - improvements which continue to benefit bus passengers and other road users. The last Council did not propose “another Council office in Acomb”. It planned to replace the Council office on York Road/Carr Lane with a facility at the Acomb Explore Library on Front Street (effectively establishing a one stop shop for what is York’s largest sub-urb). When Labour took office they simply closed the Acomb office - a decision which has contibuted to the decline in the prosperity of the Acomb commercial and retail area. Finally Labour announced on TV two weeks ago that they would be refunding Lendal Bridge fines and withdrawing their appeal against the traffic adjudicator’s judgement. Although it hasn’t received much publicity, they later admitted that no such decision had been made and that a meeting needed to be scheduled before any refunds could take place. No such meeting has been scheduled. LibDem
  • Score: 22

3:34pm Fri 25 Jul 14

Jiminy Cricket says...

Labour say that the Lib Dems also had plans to close the bridge. So once again we have a (bad) situation where, regardless of the political colour 'in charge' of the city, we have an ill thought out scheme being proposed and subsequently implemented.

What is the common denominator? OFFICERS!

Councillors are guilty, but not for devising these schemes. They are guilty for allowing incompetent officers to rule the roost and I can only presume they do this in the vain hope that they can take some credit or political point scoring. When the next change in administration comes along I hope whoever wins control takes a much closer look at what these officers are proposing and don't just take their word for it any longer. Officers have proved their incompetence repeatedly in several departments, not just transport planning and it is they who have brought shame on this great city but they are laughing as the general public are happy to blame the party that is supposed to be 'in charge'. Its a great ruse but I am surprised nobody else has realised what is really going on and who is really to blame.
Labour say that the Lib Dems also had plans to close the bridge. So once again we have a (bad) situation where, regardless of the political colour 'in charge' of the city, we have an ill thought out scheme being proposed and subsequently implemented. What is the common denominator? OFFICERS! Councillors are guilty, but not for devising these schemes. They are guilty for allowing incompetent officers to rule the roost and I can only presume they do this in the vain hope that they can take some credit or political point scoring. When the next change in administration comes along I hope whoever wins control takes a much closer look at what these officers are proposing and don't just take their word for it any longer. Officers have proved their incompetence repeatedly in several departments, not just transport planning and it is they who have brought shame on this great city but they are laughing as the general public are happy to blame the party that is supposed to be 'in charge'. Its a great ruse but I am surprised nobody else has realised what is really going on and who is really to blame. Jiminy Cricket
  • Score: 17

3:56pm Fri 25 Jul 14

Alf Garnett says...

Of course, if we had governments which allow real local control instead of Pickling everything up (I don't see why someone shouldn't park on yellow lines in order to pop into Starbucks for a coffeh, etc) then councils could make decisions, stick with them and go to the electorate at the appropriate time. We need people like Matteo Renzi, who said that he'd clear out the traffic from Florence and did so. Whatever the legal wrangling brought about by sloppy legislation, the closure was exactly the sort of thing that York needs.
Of course, if we had governments which allow real local control instead of Pickling everything up (I don't see why someone shouldn't park on yellow lines in order to pop into Starbucks for a coffeh, etc) then councils could make decisions, stick with them and go to the electorate at the appropriate time. We need people like Matteo Renzi, who said that he'd clear out the traffic from Florence and did so. Whatever the legal wrangling brought about by sloppy legislation, the closure was exactly the sort of thing that York needs. Alf Garnett
  • Score: -22

3:58pm Fri 25 Jul 14

Alf Garnett says...

bolero wrote:
It is worrying that there is not going to be a party worth voting for at the next council elections. The Lib Dems must think we have very short memories. They wasted millions of pounds of taxpayers money with their ill fated schemes. I'm afraid you still have a price to pay. The Tories are very critical but what have they to offer in place of labours money wasting hare brained schemes. Let's hear your solutions to York's congestion problems for a start. We obviously need a new outlook from people of integrity, honesty and backbone. And no, I am not advocating Green. Goodness only knows where our money would go if they got the chance.
Perhaps we really are living in the best of all possible worlds.
[quote][p][bold]bolero[/bold] wrote: It is worrying that there is not going to be a party worth voting for at the next council elections. The Lib Dems must think we have very short memories. They wasted millions of pounds of taxpayers money with their ill fated schemes. I'm afraid you still have a price to pay. The Tories are very critical but what have they to offer in place of labours money wasting hare brained schemes. Let's hear your solutions to York's congestion problems for a start. We obviously need a new outlook from people of integrity, honesty and backbone. And no, I am not advocating Green. Goodness only knows where our money would go if they got the chance.[/p][/quote]Perhaps we really are living in the best of all possible worlds. Alf Garnett
  • Score: -7

4:27pm Fri 25 Jul 14

acomblass says...

And of course Labour conveniently forget the £30k they have spent on creating a new Acomb office in Lyndsey Avenue which was supposed to open in April and is now set to open in August but with no business plan in place.

And there's a real story here if the media are interested
And of course Labour conveniently forget the £30k they have spent on creating a new Acomb office in Lyndsey Avenue which was supposed to open in April and is now set to open in August but with no business plan in place. And there's a real story here if the media are interested acomblass
  • Score: 12

5:43pm Fri 25 Jul 14

ouseswimmer says...

Gillygate traffic lights have been out for a few days yet traffic flows much better and pedestrians are safely crossing the road. I suggest turning off alternate sets of traffic lights so the flow is still regulated but faster.
Gillygate traffic lights have been out for a few days yet traffic flows much better and pedestrians are safely crossing the road. I suggest turning off alternate sets of traffic lights so the flow is still regulated but faster. ouseswimmer
  • Score: 13

6:07pm Fri 25 Jul 14

thinkingoutsidethebox says...

Well I certainly hope that the £11k is coming from the pockets of James Alexander and Dave Merrett. Both are lucky to still have jobs. It is ludicrous that gross incompetence cannot be removed by calls for resignations which fail. Sackings are needed!!
Well I certainly hope that the £11k is coming from the pockets of James Alexander and Dave Merrett. Both are lucky to still have jobs. It is ludicrous that gross incompetence cannot be removed by calls for resignations which fail. Sackings are needed!! thinkingoutsidethebox
  • Score: 17

6:23pm Fri 25 Jul 14

Cheeky face says...

The council are probably still incurring legal fees on Coppergate. Good to check this out but wasn't 1960s the period to seek legal/lawful advice on Coppergate. Why did the police feel uncomfortable penalizing motorists transgressing along Coppergate during prohibition periods. The answer lies with Bill Wooley and the police who discussed it at least 15 years ago; when they agreed it could not be a bus lane!

In another 15 years Lendal Br refunds may have happened; cyclists will need third party cover and another P and R site for York is planned for Tadcaster!
The council are probably still incurring legal fees on Coppergate. Good to check this out but wasn't 1960s the period to seek legal/lawful advice on Coppergate. Why did the police feel uncomfortable penalizing motorists transgressing along Coppergate during prohibition periods. The answer lies with Bill Wooley and the police who discussed it at least 15 years ago; when they agreed it could not be a bus lane! In another 15 years Lendal Br refunds may have happened; cyclists will need third party cover and another P and R site for York is planned for Tadcaster! Cheeky face
  • Score: 5

6:36pm Fri 25 Jul 14

oldgoat says...

thinkingoutsidethebo
x
wrote:
Well I certainly hope that the £11k is coming from the pockets of James Alexander and Dave Merrett. Both are lucky to still have jobs. It is ludicrous that gross incompetence cannot be removed by calls for resignations which fail. Sackings are needed!!
Councillors are elected so you can't sack them.
Neither are their elected offices 'jobs'.
[quote][p][bold]thinkingoutsidethebo x[/bold] wrote: Well I certainly hope that the £11k is coming from the pockets of James Alexander and Dave Merrett. Both are lucky to still have jobs. It is ludicrous that gross incompetence cannot be removed by calls for resignations which fail. Sackings are needed!![/p][/quote]Councillors are elected so you can't sack them. Neither are their elected offices 'jobs'. oldgoat
  • Score: 0

6:53pm Fri 25 Jul 14

Cheeky face says...

Quite right Oldgoat.

But leaders of councils and senior employees are allowed to communicate effectively, efficiently and within rulers/laws etc; that is the issue.
Quite right Oldgoat. But leaders of councils and senior employees are allowed to communicate effectively, efficiently and within rulers/laws etc; that is the issue. Cheeky face
  • Score: 2

7:19pm Fri 25 Jul 14

Just_My_Twopenneth says...

£11,000.... That will only cover a few hours of a lawyers time; I'm sure they won't have been getting advice legal practice's junior graduate, so the cost will be very high per hour.

The council are spending £1.5 Million on an ailing Newgate market, which isn't going to improve, just because they are going to spend that mount on it... Now that is a real spending issue, and waste of funds... I wouldn't worry about £11K, given the other wastage going on!
£11,000.... That will only cover a few hours of a lawyers time; I'm sure they won't have been getting advice legal practice's junior graduate, so the cost will be very high per hour. The council are spending £1.5 Million on an ailing Newgate market, which isn't going to improve, just because they are going to spend that mount on it... Now that is a real spending issue, and waste of funds... I wouldn't worry about £11K, given the other wastage going on! Just_My_Twopenneth
  • Score: 1

7:30pm Fri 25 Jul 14

pedalling paul says...

Shall I fuel the flames of debate.............l
ook beyond the next elections and beyond many of your own lifetimes. Consider what might need to be done now, to avoid future carmageddon.
If all the City's cyclists and bus users suddenly switched to private cars, you'd really discover what gridlock is all about.
Shall I fuel the flames of debate.............l ook beyond the next elections and beyond many of your own lifetimes. Consider what might need to be done now, to avoid future carmageddon. If all the City's cyclists and bus users suddenly switched to private cars, you'd really discover what gridlock is all about. pedalling paul
  • Score: -29

7:30pm Fri 25 Jul 14

pedalling paul says...

Shall I fuel the flames of debate.............l
ook beyond the next elections and beyond many of your own lifetimes. Consider what might need to be done now, to avoid future carmageddon.
If all the City's cyclists and bus users suddenly switched to private cars, you'd really discover what gridlock is all about.
Shall I fuel the flames of debate.............l ook beyond the next elections and beyond many of your own lifetimes. Consider what might need to be done now, to avoid future carmageddon. If all the City's cyclists and bus users suddenly switched to private cars, you'd really discover what gridlock is all about. pedalling paul
  • Score: -27

7:34pm Fri 25 Jul 14

Just_My_Twopenneth says...

PP, Your comment does appear rather 'off topic. This is about 11k being spent.'
PP, Your comment does appear rather 'off topic. This is about 11k being spent.' Just_My_Twopenneth
  • Score: 14

7:39pm Fri 25 Jul 14

Cheeky face says...

Just_My_Twopenneth wrote:
PP, Your comment does appear rather 'off topic. This is about 11k being spent.'
Quite right. And Paul, you don't have to tell us everything twice. You don't have to tell us everything twice!

What about costs re Barbican; cycle lane on A1237?
[quote][p][bold]Just_My_Twopenneth[/bold] wrote: PP, Your comment does appear rather 'off topic. This is about 11k being spent.'[/p][/quote]Quite right. And Paul, you don't have to tell us everything twice. You don't have to tell us everything twice! What about costs re Barbican; cycle lane on A1237? Cheeky face
  • Score: 15

7:53pm Fri 25 Jul 14

Dave Ruddock says...

BRING BACK YORK CORPORATION, no political party of any kind can run a **** up in a brewery without cocking it up.
York was not nor can not be changed for the motor vehicle, the 3 bridges are at full stretch at the normal to/from work times then empty to an extent. The Outer Ringroads gets blocked. money spent on widening the outer road instead of wasting on stupid, ridicules ideas. or the last resort is bring back Toll bridges on all three, then see sparks fly
BRING BACK YORK CORPORATION, no political party of any kind can run a **** up in a brewery without cocking it up. York was not nor can not be changed for the motor vehicle, the 3 bridges are at full stretch at the normal to/from work times then empty to an extent. The Outer Ringroads gets blocked. money spent on widening the outer road instead of wasting on stupid, ridicules ideas. or the last resort is bring back Toll bridges on all three, then see sparks fly Dave Ruddock
  • Score: -6

8:14pm Fri 25 Jul 14

york_chap says...

pedalling paul wrote:
Shall I fuel the flames of debate.............l

ook beyond the next elections and beyond many of your own lifetimes. Consider what might need to be done now, to avoid future carmageddon.
If all the City's cyclists and bus users suddenly switched to private cars, you'd really discover what gridlock is all about.
Whilst many of them would probably love to switch to private cars, we don't need to worry because it's not actually going to happen. There will always be a lot of people who are either too old, young, physically or financially unable to drive or who don't because they like to think they're 'green'.

Likewise, there will probably always be people who want to ride bicycles as a means of exercise, because they think it's fun or because they get a thrill out of parading about in public places wearing garish, skin-tight lycra. People have a choice of how to travel and that's just how it should be. I dislike taxis and disagree with adults riding kiddies' scooters down the pavement, but if people wish to use them then they should be free to do so.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: Shall I fuel the flames of debate.............l ook beyond the next elections and beyond many of your own lifetimes. Consider what might need to be done now, to avoid future carmageddon. If all the City's cyclists and bus users suddenly switched to private cars, you'd really discover what gridlock is all about.[/p][/quote]Whilst many of them would probably love to switch to private cars, we don't need to worry because it's not actually going to happen. There will always be a lot of people who are either too old, young, physically or financially unable to drive or who don't because they like to think they're 'green'. Likewise, there will probably always be people who want to ride bicycles as a means of exercise, because they think it's fun or because they get a thrill out of parading about in public places wearing garish, skin-tight lycra. People have a choice of how to travel and that's just how it should be. I dislike taxis and disagree with adults riding kiddies' scooters down the pavement, but if people wish to use them then they should be free to do so. york_chap
  • Score: 11

8:48pm Fri 25 Jul 14

GMuser says...

Just_My_Twopenneth wrote:
PP, Your comment does appear rather 'off topic. This is about 11k being spent.'
Absolutely correct, I am now sure Pedalling Paul has lost a grip on the real world. How many times do you need to be reminded PP just shut up.... we all know what you want. BUT in the real world is not like that.
Stick to the point.... 11K spent? Fot what? To try and justify an absolutely stupid idea........ shutting roads is not the answer.
[quote][p][bold]Just_My_Twopenneth[/bold] wrote: PP, Your comment does appear rather 'off topic. This is about 11k being spent.'[/p][/quote]Absolutely correct, I am now sure Pedalling Paul has lost a grip on the real world. How many times do you need to be reminded PP just shut up.... we all know what you want. BUT in the real world is not like that. Stick to the point.... 11K spent? Fot what? To try and justify an absolutely stupid idea........ shutting roads is not the answer. GMuser
  • Score: 7

9:14pm Fri 25 Jul 14

piaggio1 says...

And if the so called media could dig a little deeper into a er hotel....well its not really a hotel......?
And if the so called media could dig a little deeper into a er hotel....well its not really a hotel......? piaggio1
  • Score: 2

9:19pm Fri 25 Jul 14

piaggio1 says...

And as for the idiots remark ..future generations?.?
I could not give a monkeys about em..i/we wont be here...dont really think it worried the romans/saxons/ and them norman aresholes...
And as for the idiots remark ..future generations?.? I could not give a monkeys about em..i/we wont be here...dont really think it worried the romans/saxons/ and them norman aresholes... piaggio1
  • Score: 1

9:52pm Fri 25 Jul 14

JasBro says...

Good point. There are a number of unelected and unaccountable council officers who are pushing certain agendas. Their work goes on behind the scenes, and seems to go unquestioned, in spite of the huge failure of York's traffic policies in the last decade.

More pollution, more congestion, but no more cars.????? That's what's happened.

There has to be a massive question mark over the advice that our elected councilors are being given by those unelected, unseen officers.
Good point. There are a number of unelected and unaccountable council officers who are pushing certain agendas. Their work goes on behind the scenes, and seems to go unquestioned, in spite of the huge failure of York's traffic policies in the last decade. More pollution, more congestion, but no more cars.????? That's what's happened. There has to be a massive question mark over the advice that our elected councilors are being given by those unelected, unseen officers. JasBro
  • Score: 8

9:55pm Fri 25 Jul 14

julia brica says...

What happened to the York Independance Party
What happened to the York Independance Party julia brica
  • Score: 4

10:14pm Fri 25 Jul 14

Silver says...

So anyone wanting to put their name as an independant now is the time you make your money back on your deposit us ex labour voters will be voting for you instead
So anyone wanting to put their name as an independant now is the time you make your money back on your deposit us ex labour voters will be voting for you instead Silver
  • Score: 4

11:03pm Fri 25 Jul 14

AnotherPointofView says...

Silver wrote:
So anyone wanting to put their name as an independant now is the time you make your money back on your deposit us ex labour voters will be voting for you instead
Exactly. What York does need are some more independent councillors who put York's interests first rather than the politico's who tow the party line on every issue.

There are a lot of people in York who don't who to vote FOR, they just know who they would vote AGAINST.
[quote][p][bold]Silver[/bold] wrote: So anyone wanting to put their name as an independant now is the time you make your money back on your deposit us ex labour voters will be voting for you instead[/p][/quote]Exactly. What York does need are some more independent councillors who put York's interests first rather than the politico's who tow the party line on every issue. There are a lot of people in York who don't who to vote FOR, they just know who they would vote AGAINST. AnotherPointofView
  • Score: 5

11:39pm Fri 25 Jul 14

Jiminy Cricket says...

Silver wrote:
So anyone wanting to put their name as an independant now is the time you make your money back on your deposit us ex labour voters will be voting for you instead
You don't place a deposit to be a councillor (that's just for standing as an MP in a general election).

All you actually need is 10 signatures of people living in the area that you are standing for.

There will be an associated cost for campaigning if you decide to print leaflets, etc.

Looking forward to seeing some details from Y.I.P as it would be fascinating to see if its actually possible for independents to somehow join forces and take collective control of the council. I think the biggest problem will be people not getting the concept and maybe mistaking such an alliance as a localised version of UKIP.
[quote][p][bold]Silver[/bold] wrote: So anyone wanting to put their name as an independant now is the time you make your money back on your deposit us ex labour voters will be voting for you instead[/p][/quote]You don't place a deposit to be a councillor (that's just for standing as an MP in a general election). All you actually need is 10 signatures of people living in the area that you are standing for. There will be an associated cost for campaigning if you decide to print leaflets, etc. Looking forward to seeing some details from Y.I.P as it would be fascinating to see if its actually possible for independents to somehow join forces and take collective control of the council. I think the biggest problem will be people not getting the concept and maybe mistaking such an alliance as a localised version of UKIP. Jiminy Cricket
  • Score: 4

5:42am Sat 26 Jul 14

Bad magic says...

pedalling paul wrote:
Shall I fuel the flames of debate.............l

ook beyond the next elections and beyond many of your own lifetimes. Consider what might need to be done now, to avoid future carmageddon.
If all the City's cyclists and bus users suddenly switched to private cars, you'd really discover what gridlock is all about.
Yay, look. Carmageedon. You're a complete twerp. Why don't you fall back down your little hole, take your bike with you and stop bothering the real people with real jobs and real concerns, you muppet?
Oh no, I forgot. You're a blowhard do-gooding interfering dictatorial waste of carbon who honestly needs a good smack in the face.
Will you please stop telling people how to live their lives, shut the flip up and go and die somewhere quietly. If all the bus and bike users started using cars, maybe I wouldn't constantly have to worry about tossers cycling on pavements.
Why don't you solve most of my problems at once by dousing yourself in petrol, walking into the Golden Ball, hugging the rest of the cretins and then lighting a cigarette?
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: Shall I fuel the flames of debate.............l ook beyond the next elections and beyond many of your own lifetimes. Consider what might need to be done now, to avoid future carmageddon. If all the City's cyclists and bus users suddenly switched to private cars, you'd really discover what gridlock is all about.[/p][/quote]Yay, look. Carmageedon. You're a complete twerp. Why don't you fall back down your little hole, take your bike with you and stop bothering the real people with real jobs and real concerns, you muppet? Oh no, I forgot. You're a blowhard do-gooding interfering dictatorial waste of carbon who honestly needs a good smack in the face. Will you please stop telling people how to live their lives, shut the flip up and go and die somewhere quietly. If all the bus and bike users started using cars, maybe I wouldn't constantly have to worry about tossers cycling on pavements. Why don't you solve most of my problems at once by dousing yourself in petrol, walking into the Golden Ball, hugging the rest of the cretins and then lighting a cigarette? Bad magic
  • Score: 7

7:07am Sat 26 Jul 14

pedalling paul says...

Bad magic wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
Shall I fuel the flames of debate.............l


ook beyond the next elections and beyond many of your own lifetimes. Consider what might need to be done now, to avoid future carmageddon.
If all the City's cyclists and bus users suddenly switched to private cars, you'd really discover what gridlock is all about.
Yay, look. Carmageedon. You're a complete twerp. Why don't you fall back down your little hole, take your bike with you and stop bothering the real people with real jobs and real concerns, you muppet?
Oh no, I forgot. You're a blowhard do-gooding interfering dictatorial waste of carbon who honestly needs a good smack in the face.
Will you please stop telling people how to live their lives, shut the flip up and go and die somewhere quietly. If all the bus and bike users started using cars, maybe I wouldn't constantly have to worry about tossers cycling on pavements.
Why don't you solve most of my problems at once by dousing yourself in petrol, walking into the Golden Ball, hugging the rest of the cretins and then lighting a cigarette?
I'm far too virtuous to smoke and drink......hang on a mo ...I've left me pipe in t'pub!!
But seriously, I don't wear Lycra for local cycle commuting, shopping, ccouncil meetings etc. As to others perception of what I "want." Just a city where a majority of short local journeys are not made by single occupancy car...that will allow those who need to use a car for mobility reasons, a van for commercial reasons, buses, taxis, deliveries etc to more easily do so. But that will not work without a degree of restraint by car owners. Sufficient self restraint has not been forthcoming, hence the various past measures to encourage and prioritise other travel options. And York's Local Transport Plan includes policies to further reduce car dependancy, against a background of further economic expansion and increased population. Disregarding this will lead to gridlock.
This is what the Congestion Commission must tackle in a spirit of cross party co-operation, regardless of who controls York after 2015
[quote][p][bold]Bad magic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: Shall I fuel the flames of debate.............l ook beyond the next elections and beyond many of your own lifetimes. Consider what might need to be done now, to avoid future carmageddon. If all the City's cyclists and bus users suddenly switched to private cars, you'd really discover what gridlock is all about.[/p][/quote]Yay, look. Carmageedon. You're a complete twerp. Why don't you fall back down your little hole, take your bike with you and stop bothering the real people with real jobs and real concerns, you muppet? Oh no, I forgot. You're a blowhard do-gooding interfering dictatorial waste of carbon who honestly needs a good smack in the face. Will you please stop telling people how to live their lives, shut the flip up and go and die somewhere quietly. If all the bus and bike users started using cars, maybe I wouldn't constantly have to worry about tossers cycling on pavements. Why don't you solve most of my problems at once by dousing yourself in petrol, walking into the Golden Ball, hugging the rest of the cretins and then lighting a cigarette?[/p][/quote]I'm far too virtuous to smoke and drink......hang on a mo ...I've left me pipe in t'pub!! But seriously, I don't wear Lycra for local cycle commuting, shopping, ccouncil meetings etc. As to others perception of what I "want." Just a city where a majority of short local journeys are not made by single occupancy car...that will allow those who need to use a car for mobility reasons, a van for commercial reasons, buses, taxis, deliveries etc to more easily do so. But that will not work without a degree of restraint by car owners. Sufficient self restraint has not been forthcoming, hence the various past measures to encourage and prioritise other travel options. And York's Local Transport Plan includes policies to further reduce car dependancy, against a background of further economic expansion and increased population. Disregarding this will lead to gridlock. This is what the Congestion Commission must tackle in a spirit of cross party co-operation, regardless of who controls York after 2015 pedalling paul
  • Score: -10

8:41am Sat 26 Jul 14

bolero says...

pedalling paul wrote:
Bad magic wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
Shall I fuel the flames of debate.............l



ook beyond the next elections and beyond many of your own lifetimes. Consider what might need to be done now, to avoid future carmageddon.
If all the City's cyclists and bus users suddenly switched to private cars, you'd really discover what gridlock is all about.
Yay, look. Carmageedon. You're a complete twerp. Why don't you fall back down your little hole, take your bike with you and stop bothering the real people with real jobs and real concerns, you muppet?
Oh no, I forgot. You're a blowhard do-gooding interfering dictatorial waste of carbon who honestly needs a good smack in the face.
Will you please stop telling people how to live their lives, shut the flip up and go and die somewhere quietly. If all the bus and bike users started using cars, maybe I wouldn't constantly have to worry about tossers cycling on pavements.
Why don't you solve most of my problems at once by dousing yourself in petrol, walking into the Golden Ball, hugging the rest of the cretins and then lighting a cigarette?
I'm far too virtuous to smoke and drink......hang on a mo ...I've left me pipe in t'pub!!
But seriously, I don't wear Lycra for local cycle commuting, shopping, ccouncil meetings etc. As to others perception of what I "want." Just a city where a majority of short local journeys are not made by single occupancy car...that will allow those who need to use a car for mobility reasons, a van for commercial reasons, buses, taxis, deliveries etc to more easily do so. But that will not work without a degree of restraint by car owners. Sufficient self restraint has not been forthcoming, hence the various past measures to encourage and prioritise other travel options. And York's Local Transport Plan includes policies to further reduce car dependancy, against a background of further economic expansion and increased population. Disregarding this will lead to gridlock.
This is what the Congestion Commission must tackle in a spirit of cross party co-operation, regardless of who controls York after 2015
...yak,yak,yak,yak,y
ak,yak,yak,yak,yak,b
lah,blah,blah,blah,b
lah,blah,blah,gurgle
,gurgle,gurgle,gurgl
e,gurgle,gurgle,Aaaa
aaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhh.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bad magic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: Shall I fuel the flames of debate.............l ook beyond the next elections and beyond many of your own lifetimes. Consider what might need to be done now, to avoid future carmageddon. If all the City's cyclists and bus users suddenly switched to private cars, you'd really discover what gridlock is all about.[/p][/quote]Yay, look. Carmageedon. You're a complete twerp. Why don't you fall back down your little hole, take your bike with you and stop bothering the real people with real jobs and real concerns, you muppet? Oh no, I forgot. You're a blowhard do-gooding interfering dictatorial waste of carbon who honestly needs a good smack in the face. Will you please stop telling people how to live their lives, shut the flip up and go and die somewhere quietly. If all the bus and bike users started using cars, maybe I wouldn't constantly have to worry about tossers cycling on pavements. Why don't you solve most of my problems at once by dousing yourself in petrol, walking into the Golden Ball, hugging the rest of the cretins and then lighting a cigarette?[/p][/quote]I'm far too virtuous to smoke and drink......hang on a mo ...I've left me pipe in t'pub!! But seriously, I don't wear Lycra for local cycle commuting, shopping, ccouncil meetings etc. As to others perception of what I "want." Just a city where a majority of short local journeys are not made by single occupancy car...that will allow those who need to use a car for mobility reasons, a van for commercial reasons, buses, taxis, deliveries etc to more easily do so. But that will not work without a degree of restraint by car owners. Sufficient self restraint has not been forthcoming, hence the various past measures to encourage and prioritise other travel options. And York's Local Transport Plan includes policies to further reduce car dependancy, against a background of further economic expansion and increased population. Disregarding this will lead to gridlock. This is what the Congestion Commission must tackle in a spirit of cross party co-operation, regardless of who controls York after 2015[/p][/quote]...yak,yak,yak,yak,y ak,yak,yak,yak,yak,b lah,blah,blah,blah,b lah,blah,blah,gurgle ,gurgle,gurgle,gurgl e,gurgle,gurgle,Aaaa aaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhh. bolero
  • Score: 2

8:58am Sat 26 Jul 14

thinkingoutsidethebox says...

oldgoat wrote:
thinkingoutsidethebo

x
wrote:
Well I certainly hope that the £11k is coming from the pockets of James Alexander and Dave Merrett. Both are lucky to still have jobs. It is ludicrous that gross incompetence cannot be removed by calls for resignations which fail. Sackings are needed!!
Councillors are elected so you can't sack them.
Neither are their elected offices 'jobs'.
I know that to be the case BUT it shouldn't be the case where incompetence and negligence exist. I stated that it is ludicrous that gross incompetence cannot be removed AND IT IS
[quote][p][bold]oldgoat[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thinkingoutsidethebo x[/bold] wrote: Well I certainly hope that the £11k is coming from the pockets of James Alexander and Dave Merrett. Both are lucky to still have jobs. It is ludicrous that gross incompetence cannot be removed by calls for resignations which fail. Sackings are needed!![/p][/quote]Councillors are elected so you can't sack them. Neither are their elected offices 'jobs'.[/p][/quote]I know that to be the case BUT it shouldn't be the case where incompetence and negligence exist. I stated that it is ludicrous that gross incompetence cannot be removed AND IT IS thinkingoutsidethebox
  • Score: 1

1:05pm Sat 26 Jul 14

York1900 says...

TheMinsterMen wrote:
the original Homer wrote:
We shouldn't criticise them for taking legal advice. That is one of the few things they have done right.

Presumably they were told that an appeal was pointless, as stated on this website several times.

It would be interesting to know if they paid for any earlier advice which turned out to be wrong though.

In fairness, I would expect any council of any political flavour to consult external legal experts when required, and £11k over 4 months is much cheaper than employing one.
I'm surprised that your post has been downrated, it's perfectly logical reasoning - why wouldn't legal advice be sought on a legal matter. We can critise the cost, but is that not more of an issue with the choice of solicitor and even so gaining external expert advice does cost a significant amount, as anyone involved in business knows.

I was no supporter of the bridge trial by any means, or this labour council. But perhaps if this money was spent prior to the trial to establish the legal position, they wouldn't have started it at all.
But perhaps if this money was spent prior to the trial to establish the legal position well that should of been down to the CEO of York City Council and the transport department to check out the legal position and report back to councillors on the legal position.
But like most things those who are doing the day to day running of the City don't seem to do much for there pay
[quote][p][bold]TheMinsterMen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]the original Homer[/bold] wrote: We shouldn't criticise them for taking legal advice. That is one of the few things they have done right. Presumably they were told that an appeal was pointless, as stated on this website several times. It would be interesting to know if they paid for any earlier advice which turned out to be wrong though. In fairness, I would expect any council of any political flavour to consult external legal experts when required, and £11k over 4 months is much cheaper than employing one.[/p][/quote]I'm surprised that your post has been downrated, it's perfectly logical reasoning - why wouldn't legal advice be sought on a legal matter. We can critise the cost, but is that not more of an issue with the choice of solicitor and even so gaining external expert advice does cost a significant amount, as anyone involved in business knows. I was no supporter of the bridge trial by any means, or this labour council. But perhaps if this money was spent prior to the trial to establish the legal position, they wouldn't have started it at all.[/p][/quote]But perhaps if this money was spent prior to the trial to establish the legal position well that should of been down to the CEO of York City Council and the transport department to check out the legal position and report back to councillors on the legal position. But like most things those who are doing the day to day running of the City don't seem to do much for there pay York1900
  • Score: 0

5:19pm Sat 26 Jul 14

Jack Ham says...

Never mind.

Bloodaxe aka Cllr Sonja Crisp told us on here last week that the £18,000 spent on the so called 'Fairness Commission' was "peanuts".

If that's the case then £11,000 isn't worth even thinking about.

Labour and finance. It would be funny if it was their own money.
Never mind. Bloodaxe aka Cllr Sonja Crisp told us on here last week that the £18,000 spent on the so called 'Fairness Commission' was "peanuts". If that's the case then £11,000 isn't worth even thinking about. Labour and finance. It would be funny if it was their own money. Jack Ham
  • Score: -1

10:49pm Sat 26 Jul 14

strangebuttrue? says...

So I wonder how much more will be spent protecting the perpetrator of the Lendal Bridge closure who said he would resign if they (whoever they are) got it that wrong.

One commentator above said officers were the common denominator I would beg to differ. Take a look at Mr Merrett's record he has been chair of committees on all things traffic in York since 2006. This incidentally coincides with the time pollution started to rise in York without any increase in traffic volume.

There is a simple solution to York's congestion issues. Reverse all the anti car measures put in since 2006. But as I am sure you will have noticed every time the council speak on this subject they say "York's congestion problems that will not go away." This in other words means they have no intension of taking out their anti car measures despite the increases in pollution they have caused.
So I wonder how much more will be spent protecting the perpetrator of the Lendal Bridge closure who said he would resign if they (whoever they are) got it that wrong. One commentator above said officers were the common denominator I would beg to differ. Take a look at Mr Merrett's record he has been chair of committees on all things traffic in York since 2006. This incidentally coincides with the time pollution started to rise in York without any increase in traffic volume. There is a simple solution to York's congestion issues. Reverse all the anti car measures put in since 2006. But as I am sure you will have noticed every time the council speak on this subject they say "York's congestion problems that will not go away." This in other words means they have no intension of taking out their anti car measures despite the increases in pollution they have caused. strangebuttrue?
  • Score: 3

8:38am Mon 28 Jul 14

Cheeky face says...

strangebuttrue? wrote:
So I wonder how much more will be spent protecting the perpetrator of the Lendal Bridge closure who said he would resign if they (whoever they are) got it that wrong.

One commentator above said officers were the common denominator I would beg to differ. Take a look at Mr Merrett's record he has been chair of committees on all things traffic in York since 2006. This incidentally coincides with the time pollution started to rise in York without any increase in traffic volume.

There is a simple solution to York's congestion issues. Reverse all the anti car measures put in since 2006. But as I am sure you will have noticed every time the council speak on this subject they say "York's congestion problems that will not go away." This in other words means they have no intension of taking out their anti car measures despite the increases in pollution they have caused.
The congestion problem, accordingly to the council, will not go away. It could be looked at with a cross party team which could be supplemented by road users. If they get their act together the congestion can be reduced.
Where's the money...... well we know already ....it is stored/ringfenced awaiting the review on Coppergate. The Coppergate prohibition of motor vehicle scheme was always doubtful even before the CCTV use , but the need to do something was paramount. Presumably the council are still spending on legal fees re Coppergate.... GET IT DONE SOON SO THE CCTV USE CAN BE CORRECTLY IMPLEMENTED IN A FAIR WAY. The signs need moving first, and the web-site page on the restriction either adhered to
or modified, so that what is on the web is what is happening.

Some traffic lights should be peak time only, and pedestrian/disabled issue discuused when considering them.
[quote][p][bold]strangebuttrue?[/bold] wrote: So I wonder how much more will be spent protecting the perpetrator of the Lendal Bridge closure who said he would resign if they (whoever they are) got it that wrong. One commentator above said officers were the common denominator I would beg to differ. Take a look at Mr Merrett's record he has been chair of committees on all things traffic in York since 2006. This incidentally coincides with the time pollution started to rise in York without any increase in traffic volume. There is a simple solution to York's congestion issues. Reverse all the anti car measures put in since 2006. But as I am sure you will have noticed every time the council speak on this subject they say "York's congestion problems that will not go away." This in other words means they have no intension of taking out their anti car measures despite the increases in pollution they have caused.[/p][/quote]The congestion problem, accordingly to the council, will not go away. It could be looked at with a cross party team which could be supplemented by road users. If they get their act together the congestion can be reduced. Where's the money...... well we know already ....it is stored/ringfenced awaiting the review on Coppergate. The Coppergate prohibition of motor vehicle scheme was always doubtful even before the CCTV use , but the need to do something was paramount. Presumably the council are still spending on legal fees re Coppergate.... GET IT DONE SOON SO THE CCTV USE CAN BE CORRECTLY IMPLEMENTED IN A FAIR WAY. The signs need moving first, and the web-site page on the restriction either adhered to or modified, so that what is on the web is what is happening. Some traffic lights should be peak time only, and pedestrian/disabled issue discuused when considering them. Cheeky face
  • Score: 0

6:16pm Mon 28 Jul 14

York1234 says...

There are officers pushing internally for automatic payments to be made back to those who have been fined. However, the push we hear is some ridiculous 'can't do this because it's admitting liability'. Guess what? You were wrong, it's not your money give it back.

You've got the details of all those you fined. Send them a letter and stick it in their account.

I bet it wont be those who made the decisions on this fiasco who will be behind the scenes sorting out the thousands of replies. How much more will this cost us just trying to sort out a 'simple' process? How many hours spent doing it?

Wish I could submit FOI to find out but then my cover would be blown and things would get difficult at work.
There are officers pushing internally for automatic payments to be made back to those who have been fined. However, the push we hear is some ridiculous 'can't do this because it's admitting liability'. Guess what? You were wrong, it's not your money give it back. You've got the details of all those you fined. Send them a letter and stick it in their account. I bet it wont be those who made the decisions on this fiasco who will be behind the scenes sorting out the thousands of replies. How much more will this cost us just trying to sort out a 'simple' process? How many hours spent doing it? Wish I could submit FOI to find out but then my cover would be blown and things would get difficult at work. York1234
  • Score: 2

7:01pm Tue 29 Jul 14

Cheeky face says...

York1234 wrote:
There are officers pushing internally for automatic payments to be made back to those who have been fined. However, the push we hear is some ridiculous 'can't do this because it's admitting liability'. Guess what? You were wrong, it's not your money give it back.

You've got the details of all those you fined. Send them a letter and stick it in their account.

I bet it wont be those who made the decisions on this fiasco who will be behind the scenes sorting out the thousands of replies. How much more will this cost us just trying to sort out a 'simple' process? How many hours spent doing it?

Wish I could submit FOI to find out but then my cover would be blown and things would get difficult at work.
Giving back on goodwill grounds is generally not admitting liability. So why are the council not fighting the legality. Something awry I fear.

The longer it goes on the worse it will become to be administered. Some motorists will have moved, some changed cars, a few rental firms ceased trading. How many payments of fines by cheque "bounced"?

It all seemed so unavoidable; as an efficient council would have pushed got the Yellow Card option.

Were motorcyclists heading to the station actually caught by the cameras which only faced one way? The facts/stats are available by a genuine FOI requester.
[quote][p][bold]York1234[/bold] wrote: There are officers pushing internally for automatic payments to be made back to those who have been fined. However, the push we hear is some ridiculous 'can't do this because it's admitting liability'. Guess what? You were wrong, it's not your money give it back. You've got the details of all those you fined. Send them a letter and stick it in their account. I bet it wont be those who made the decisions on this fiasco who will be behind the scenes sorting out the thousands of replies. How much more will this cost us just trying to sort out a 'simple' process? How many hours spent doing it? Wish I could submit FOI to find out but then my cover would be blown and things would get difficult at work.[/p][/quote]Giving back on goodwill grounds is generally not admitting liability. So why are the council not fighting the legality. Something awry I fear. The longer it goes on the worse it will become to be administered. Some motorists will have moved, some changed cars, a few rental firms ceased trading. How many payments of fines by cheque "bounced"? It all seemed so unavoidable; as an efficient council would have pushed got the Yellow Card option. Were motorcyclists heading to the station actually caught by the cameras which only faced one way? The facts/stats are available by a genuine FOI requester. Cheeky face
  • Score: 0

8:59pm Tue 29 Jul 14

Budgie says...

Does anyone ever see any passengers on the Poppleton Park and Ride buses,another waste of money
Does anyone ever see any passengers on the Poppleton Park and Ride buses,another waste of money Budgie
  • Score: 0

6:54am Wed 30 Jul 14

thinkingoutsidethebox says...

Budgie wrote:
Does anyone ever see any passengers on the Poppleton Park and Ride buses,another waste of money
no - they are mostly empty. Sometimes they are carrying one or two passengers and rarely they have a dozen or so passengers. Rickshaws could do it!! I would guess that drivers are under instruction not to make eye contact with anyone for fear of embarrasment. Traffic flow also worsened in this area, and that roundabout is dangerous. Very narrow lanes where artics will never be able to confine to the lane they are travelling in.
[quote][p][bold]Budgie[/bold] wrote: Does anyone ever see any passengers on the Poppleton Park and Ride buses,another waste of money[/p][/quote]no - they are mostly empty. Sometimes they are carrying one or two passengers and rarely they have a dozen or so passengers. Rickshaws could do it!! I would guess that drivers are under instruction not to make eye contact with anyone for fear of embarrasment. Traffic flow also worsened in this area, and that roundabout is dangerous. Very narrow lanes where artics will never be able to confine to the lane they are travelling in. thinkingoutsidethebox
  • 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