Bus gates are a peculiar British phenomenon: very short bus lanes with minimal signage which catch out large numbers of motorists. If you go through a bus gate, some weeks later you receive a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) from the council. This tells you that you are liable to pay a fine, now £160 in London but less elsewhere. You can halve this and avoid hassle by paying up within the next 14 days.
The next deadline is 28 days: you've now lost the possibility of a discount but you can still challenge the fine. If you let the 28 days pass without either challenging the fine or paying it, they serve a 'charge certificate' on you. This adds 50% to the fine. If you don't pay this within 14 days, they pass the debt to bailiffs, and the charges really start to escalate.
It takes time and effort to challenge a PCN. First you make representations to the council. They could accept those representations and cancel the fine (but they rarely do). When they don't, you face the choice of appealing to an adjudicator, who is an independent lawyer, or paying the fine. If you submitted your representations within 14 days of receiving the PCN, you are re-offered the discount. If you appeal to the adjudicator, the success rate is less than 10%. If you lose, you then have 28 days to pay the full fine; the discount has now been lost.
The consequence is that most people take the discount and pay up within 14 days. It's really only worth putting in the effort to make representations if you're committed to fighting the PCN all the way. This may either be on principle or because you've missed the 14-day window for the discount. Whatever happens, do not let the 28-day deadline pass without either paying up or making representations.
There are forums and networks of public-spirited people who assist motorists seeking to challenge PCNs, e.g. www.ftla.uk. This website does not offer bespoke advice. Instead it provides information about what bus gates are, how they have developed, their signage and the law relating to civil enforcement of moving traffic offences. It also describes and analyses a selection of bus gates and other places where large numbers of PCNs are issued.
While this site is under construction, pages which are incomplete are shown in square brackets.
Locations covered or forthcoming include:
[Bridge End, Leeds]
[Bull Lane, Enfield]
[Canal Street, Nottingham]
[Charlton Road, Harrow]
[Cumberland Road, Bristol]
[Headstone Lane, Harrow]
[High Street, Oxford]
[John Donald Street, Newcastle]
[Keep Left signs with a lane to the right of the sign]
[Merton School Streets]
[Rivercourt Road, Hammersmith & Fulham]
[St Aldates (also referred to as Folly Bridge), Oxford]
For each location, the signage is analysed. At some, there are issues with the underlying traffic order. Defects are identified which can be raised in representations against PCNs. If your PCN is at a different site, the analysis won't be directly relevant, but there may be similarities in the signage. Many successful appeals are allowed because the adjudicator finds that the signage was inadequate. You may be able to adapt material about another location for your own use.
It is always better if you write your own representations rather than just copying from a website. Representations usually say something along these lines (don't use this wording: write it in your own words):
I reject the allegation in the PCN. No contravention occurred for the following reasons [complete as appropriate, e.g.]
The traffic order contains defects which make it unenforceable.
The traffic order doesn't match what the signs show, so the signs have not been placed lawfully and are legally void.
The signage was inadequate: as I approached, all I saw was ...
I was being followed closely by another vehicle. This meant that when I saw the sign ...
I was following a bus. This meant that I didn't see any signs until ...
There were vehicles parked by the kerb / in the inside lane which meant that I didn't see the sign ...
It was dark and ...
It was raining heavily and ...
or whatever.
The first two reasons are very strong. They should only be used where the relevant sub-pages indicate that these defects are present, e.g. Camrose Avenue, Harrow; Rivercourt Road, Hammersmith.
After you've set out your case in your own words, you can then provide further information about some of your main points. Use headings to make it clear which point you're talking about. Here you may choose to copy material rather than writing it yourself. It will be obvious what you've done, but no matter.
When you submit your representations, you are offered a box in which to enter your text. If you do this, you will lose any formatting. It's better to prepare your representations in a word processor and then submit them as a formatted document, either in a word-processing format, e.g. .docx, or as a .pdf file. This is particularly true if you want to include images in your submission: you can put them in your document where they will have most effect.
When the council rejects your representations, you need to decide whether to proceed with your appeal. Unless the discount is re-offered, you've got nothing to lose by appealing. In the worst case, you're just postponing the day when you will have to pay the full fine. You don't need to do more than complete the online form and say "I refer to my representations. The council has not considered them fairly".
Study the council's response to your representations. If you think what they've said is wrong, explain why in your appeal. If it was raining or dark when the PCN was issued and the photos which the council supplies are taken on a clear day, complain that they're unrepresentative of what you saw and that the signage was inadequate for the conditions you faced. The more you write in your own words, the better your chances.
As with the representations, if you make them in the box on the website, you lose any formatting. If you've got more to say than a few sentences, you're better off submitting a .docx or .pdf file.
Do tick the box for a hearing in person. This is now done on the web or by telephone. You don't need to go anywhere. It always helps if the adjudicator can see and hear you make your own points and question you. This enables the adjudicator to say:
I heard Mr X and found him a credible witness. I accept his evidence that a parked lorry obscured the sign which otherwise would have told him of the restriction ahead. I find therefore that at the time that he approached the bus gate, the signage was inadequate and that therefore no contravention occurred.
Adjudicators much prefer to allow appeals for reasons which they have had the opportunity to explore with the appellant. As such reasons depend on the individual circumstances of the case, they don't help other appellants at the same site. If the adjudicator finds that the signage is defective (and especially if there is a series of such findings), the council may seek a review. This ties up the senior adjudicator and is a black mark against the adjudicator. If the review goes against the council, it may seek judicial review in the High Court. This is a legal action between the council and the tribunal which employs the adjudicators, i.e. between two public bodies. The appellant is named as a third party, but usually takes no part in the case.
Neither the council nor the tribunal likes the cost of going to judicial review. Each has a strong incentive to avoid it. A council is likely to seek judicial review only if its revenue stream is threatened. If the threat can be averted by making changes to the signage, the council may do so (but will assess the impact on future revenues).
A council is very likely to challenge an adjudicator's finding that a traffic order is unenforceable: it threatens not only future revenues but also past revenues. This means that adjudicators rarely address such arguments in their findings. Once they have allowed an appeal for one reason, they need do no more. But if they reject all other reasons, they must consider an appellant's argument that the traffic order is unenforceable.
If they reject this also, the appellant loses but can ask for a review. That could lead on to a judicial review. All parties — the appellant, the council, the adjudicator and the tribunal — would prefer it if the appeal was allowed for some other reason. So much the better if that reason is one based on the adjudicator's assessment of what the appellant said at the hearing.
A word of warning: this website does not contain legal advice. It describes and analyses locations and the law relating to traffic signs and moving traffic offences. It contains links to legislation, judgments and the Traffic Signs Manual so that you can check them yourself.
Pages are dated and reflect my understanding at that date. Changes are always being made to roads, their signage and the law, so they may not be correct. Please get in touch if something is wrong.
See the About page for information about copyright and contacting me.
Written 27th October 2025; last updated 16th November 2025