Rotherhithe Tunnel

[Amarillo]

Sent to TfL today.

​

Dear Ms La Tegola,​

​

I initially asked about any restrictions on campervans less than 2m wide and less than 2m high, with the V5 changed as a legal requirement to show body type “MOTOR CARAVAN”, through the Rotherhithe Tunnel on 5 June.​

​

The DfT treat such vehicles as cars for driving restrictions such as speed limits.​

​

Does TfL treat these vehicles differently from the DfT for passage through the Rotherhithe Tunnel, i.e. as goods vehicles?​

​

This is a very basic question, yet six weeks on and I have not received a reply.​

​

Can you please escalate my query to someone who is capable of answering this very simple question, and give me the name of a contact who will be dealing with this enquiry?​

​

Best regards,​

Tom Crispin​

 

[ejmoore]

Ok, I have challenged the PCN with this wording:

The vehicle is not a commercial van or goods vehicle.
It is a campervan, a purpose-built Volkswagen California.
It is registered as vehicle type MOTOR CARAVAN, taxation class PRIVATE / LIGHT GOODS (PLG). The registration certificate is attached.

As the vehicle is not a goods vehicle but a private campervan, the prohibition on 'goods vehicles exceeding max gross weight indicated' has been wrongly applied and the PCN should not have been served.

Please cancel the PCN as there has been no violation of the prohibition on goods vehicles in this case.

Let's see what they say!

 

[steven239]

 

[steven239]

Adjudicator's decision above. Not positive unfortunately. He seems content that whatever it rolls off the production line as, is what it will remain despite any changes or body type reclassifications.

 

[steven239]

Below is the evidence pack and letter that Tfl submitted to the adjudicator before he made his decision above. It runs into 50+ pages so I will post the most relevant parts and the specific Rotherhithe legislation that they lean on.

 

[Amarillo]

Adjudicator's decision above. Not positive unfortunately. He seems content that whatever it rolls off the production line as, is what it will remain despite any changes or body type reclassifications.

Wow! The adjudicator is saying that your campervan is a goods vehicle and is defined as that by the N1 classification and that nothing can change that other than a change of the N1 classification.

It seems grossly unfair that an M1 classed California can pass freely under the Thames through the Rotherhithe Tunnel but a similar campervan converted from an N1 classified van cannot.

 

[Amarillo]

Below is the evidence pack and letter that Tfl submitted to the adjudicator before he made his decision above. It runs into 50+ pages so I will post the most relevant parts and the specific Rotherhithe legislation that they lean on.

Wow again!

TfL were clearly taking your challenge very seriously. 50 pages of evidence!?

 

[steven239]

 

[steven239]

First page didn't work for some reason, here it is again

 

[steven239]

Still not working, to be fair it's not relevant anyway.

 

[steven239]

Wow again!

TfL were clearly taking your challenge very seriously. 50 pages of evidence!?

A lot of it is repetition; either copies of my representation, copies of the photo evidence, signage etc, some lovely high quality prints of my camper, loads of info about how their plate recognition software works (at this point I started to feel like they were attempting to drown the adjudicator in irrelevant waffle).

 

[Amarillo]

Paragraph 2 on page 5 of TfL’s evidence seems most relevant. It places equal weight on “body type” as other aspects of the V5 to define the vehicle type. Slightly less emphasis on the use of the “taxation class” to define vehicle type.

If I had £50,000 hanging around that I really didn’t want or have any use for, I’d go for a judicial review.

Failing that highly unlikely scenario, I’d cut my losses and pay the fine, and drown the injustice of the system in the pub.

 

[Beeechke1]

Wow! The adjudicator is saying that your campervan is a goods vehicle and is defined as that by the N1 classification and that nothing can change that other than a change of the N1 classification.

It seems grossly unfair that an M1 classed California can pass freely under the Thames through the Rotherhithe Tunnel but a similar campervan converted from an N1 classified van cannot.

It appears to me reading this thread andthe other current thread on here DVLA classification is all a bit hit and miss. My V5 for my California T5 SE issued February 2018 reads:
Body type - Motor Caravan
Taxation Class - PLG
Vehicle Category - (blank)
Resulting in California SE /Oceans being treated differently by Tfl depending on the original V5 registrations

 

[steven239]

 

[steven239]

Failing that highly unlikely scenario, I’d cut my losses and pay the fine, and drown the injustice of the system in the pub.

Yep, already done. Frustrating but not worth pursuing further.

 

[steven239]

I got another in a UKPC car park in Lewisham yesterday (the SportsDirect, Matalan carpark for those that are local). On a faded signs it says 'No Commercial Vehicles'! The warden had blanket ticketed anything that wasn't a car, including vans without any signage which could easily have been a private vehicle, MPVs based on van bodys and my camper! It seems nowadays that in the wild west of private parking you are guilty until you prove your innocence. But even if I was a commercial vehicle since when have the plumbers, electricians and builders of the world not been allowed to buy a pair of trainers at SportsDirect ... you have to laugh, SportsDirect even sells Hi-Vis and workman gear, not to mention camping equipment. I had bought a pair of trainers so I will of course be arguing on both points that I was a customer and not a commercial vehicle. It strikes me that if they actually wanted to prevent tradies utilising the 2 hour parking to do a small job in one of the many surrounding residential tower blocks, then it would be easy for them to do; just install a pay/display car park with parking refunded for actual customers at the point of sale in store...... they've obviously decided that the fine structure is the most lucrative.

 

[Loz]

Sorry to read that,
Q: Did you point out to him that following a conversion to a Motorcaravan it is never possible to change N1 to M1 and that Rotheride must take the body type into consideration?

 

[steven239]

Sorry to read that,
Q: Did you point out to him that following a conversion to a Motorcaravan it is never possible to change N1 to M1 and that Rotheride must take the body type into consideration?

Yes it was in my representation to TFL and in my letter to the adjudicator that DVLA currently only allow the Body Type to be changed and not the classification; he didn't seem interested. I am of course glad that California drivers have no problem but it is obviously bonkers that a legally converted SWB is treated differently. Luckily for me it is only a mild inconvenience not using the Rotherhithe, it must be a right pain in the backside for a lot of others in a similar situation.

 

[Loz]

We need a California go-slow protest drive through the tunnel..

 

[Neuon2003]

Interesting. Challenging the decision does not require a Judicial Review. There is a right to request a review (high threshold) How can I challenge the outcome of my appeal?

If I understand it, it seems the Adjudication is that whilst the DVLA body type "Motor caravan" does modify (not change) the EU type approval N1 (Light Goods Vehicle) in respect of speed limits, it does not modify the type approval for a TRO? I think Body type "Motor caravan" may be a N1 modifier in other situations (MOT; VED?; others?) as well. Still no wiser why this TRO is a protected category where the N1 modifier does not apply.

 

[Loz]

Why didn't they just restrict the tunnel to cars only and put a Cars only sign up?

 

[Amarillo]

Why didn't they just restrict the tunnel to cars only and put a Cars only sign up?

Or 2m height, 2m width and 2t weight restriction for all vehicles.

I guess the higher weight limit for non goods vehicles is to quell a possible rebellion from black cab drivers before that rebellion begins.

 

[Neuon2003]

possible rebellion from black cab drivers

Also allows CDV 'car-derived vans’ (max laden weight not exceeding 2 tonnes) to use the tunnel.

 

[ejmoore]

This doesn't bode well for my PCN challenge, but here's what they have now asked me for. Might as well continue with it as I don't know how to get out of it until they officially reject it
.

 

[andyinluton]

This doesn't bode well for my PCN challenge, but here's what they have now asked me for. Might as well continue with it as I don't know how to get out of it until they officially reject it
. View attachment 48349

If your V5 states M1 you can use all the statements above by the adjudicator to show you are permitted.

The adjudicator has been quite clear that its the vehicle type being N1 that they have used to decide its a goods vehicle.

I know it was a bit of a lottery with early californias as to what they were registered as & some did actually get changed from N1 to M1 when DVLA & VW agreed they had previously got it wrong.