Latest news with #WestDulwichActionGroup
BBC News
6 days ago
- BBC News
West Dulwich LTN must be removed immediately, court rules
A low-traffic neighbourhood (LTN) scheme in south London must be removed with immediate effect, following an order by the High Council was told in May that the imposition of the LTN in West Dulwich was unlawful, and has been denied permission to appeal against the aim to reduce motor traffic in residential areas by using either cameras, planters or lockable bollards, but opponents have criticised their West Dulwich Action Group (WDAG), which brought the legal challenge, described the ruling as " a wake-up call to councils everywhere". Lambeth Council must also pay £35,000 towards the legal costs incurred by WDAG. The action group said questions must now be asked about the revenue raised by penalising motorists contravening the LTN rules - and whether the more-than £1m total raised in penalty notices will have to be repaid.A WDAG spokesperson said the group had called upon Lambeth Council to clarify whether it would issue refunds. "This is not just about legality — it's about fairness and public trust. If the law was broken, the money should be paid back."This case should never have gone to court. It could have been resolved through proper, respectful dialogue. Instead, Lambeth chose to defend litigation over listening — and the public has paid for it." In response to the decision, Lambeth Council said it "remained committed to delivering our programme to reduce road danger for those most at risk and make our streets calmer, more community-friendly places."The High Court has ordered the removal of West Dulwich street improvements. No further fines will be issued, and we are removing the scheme as soon as it can be done safely."
Daily Mail
6 days ago
- Business
- Daily Mail
Fightback against hated LTN that made Labour-run council £1million in fines as it is ordered by High Court to scrap 'unlawful' low-traffic neighbourhood in first case of its kind
A Labour run-council has been ordered by the High Court to scrap a hated LTN which earned £1million in fines. An 'unlawful' low-traffic neighbourhood in West Dulwich, south London will become the first in the UK to be axed after a judge rejected an appeal from Lambeth council. The council will now have to pay out £35,000 in legal fees to the West Dulwich Action Group (WDAG), which brought the case, but campaigners are calling for this to be increased to include the £1,080,580 taken in penalties. Nonetheless, the body welcomed the decision to close the LTN which they argued had increased pollution and traffic on bordering roads. A spokesman for WDAG said: 'This ruling is definitive – the LTN was unlawful. The council has lost, has been denied permission to appeal, and must now face the consequences of what that means. 'At the top of that list is the £1 million in fines it issued while the unlawful scheme was in place. 'We now call on Lambeth Council to clarify whether it will refund those fines. This is not just about legality – it's about fairness and public trust. If the law was broken, the money should be paid back.' The group has also pleaded with the council to avoid taking the case any further via another appeal, adding that it would waste yet more public funds. The 'unlawful' low-traffic neighbourhood, pictured, in West Dulwich, south London will become the first in the UK to be axed They said: 'Doing so would further waste taxpayers' money and signal that its priority is protecting revenue, not engaging with the community it serves. 'Let's be clear: this case should never have gone to court. It could have been resolved through proper, respectful dialogue. Instead, chose to defend litigation over listening – and the public has paid for it. 'It's a wake-up call to councils everywhere: to not impose blanket schemes ignoring genuine concerns and issues, and to work with your communities. 'We again invite Lambeth to return to the table and help co-create fairer, smarter approaches to car use, pollution, road safety, and sustainable travel – with data, community support, and clear success measures at the heart of every decision.' Mr Justice Smith warned council bosses not to 'revoke' the LTN, which was introduced last year, instead of it being 'quashed' by a court ruling. He wrote: 'Revoking the orders after I have made a finding of unlawfulness leaves the same impression as would an attempt to resign immediately after one has been fired.' The judge also ordered the council to implement the ruling immediately, calling on them not to defer removing the LTN, as it had 'known of the need to instruct these works to take place since May 9' when it initially lost the High Court case. He rejected the local authority's bid to avoid paying WDAG's legal costs on the grounds that they had won only one of three legal challenges, branding the attempt 'misconceived' due to the fact that residents had been 'wholly successful'. Mr Justice Smith added: 'Here the claimant came to court seeking a quashing of the [traffic] orders. It has gone away having achieved that objective. It has therefore been completely successful. 'The fact that the claimant has succeeded in only one of its three grounds of claim does not alter the fact that it has been wholly successful in its aims.' In his May ruling, he found Lambeth council guilty of a 'serious falling' following its deicision to ignore an 'impressive' report suggesting street closures could cause a spike in pollution and congestion in the surrounding area. Mr Justice Smith also described a council document ignoring 'hostility' expressed towards the LTN in a public consultation as a 'masterclass in selective partial reporting'. It emerged in February that staff working for the local authority had been handed a 'wellbeing day' off having been 'left in tears' in the wake of residents making their 'anger' known at a 2023 meeting at West Norwood Library. The barrister for Lambeth Council, Heather Sargeant, wrote that the meeting brought councillors to tears and forced council staff to take a lunch break to 'get away' from the hostility from angry residents. She wrote: 'The experience of officers attending the event for the council (on a Saturday) was so negative that the then head of transport strategy and programmes offered them a day of wellbeing leave.' The opponents to the LTN criticised the council for a lack of public consultation and argued this made the proposal unlawful. Lambeth council spokesman said: 'We implemented the West Dulwich street improvements to reduce road danger and create a safer and healthier neighbourhood. 'We remain committed to delivering our programme to reduce road danger for those most at-risk and make our streets calmer, more community-friendly places. 'The High Court has ordered the removal of West Dulwich street improvements. No further fines will be issued, and we are removing the scheme as soon as it can be done safely.' The spokesman did not acknowledge WDAG's demands for more than £1m in fines to be reimbursed.
Telegraph
6 days ago
- Business
- Telegraph
Labour council forced to axe LTN that raked in £1m
A Labour council has been ordered to immediately scrap an 'unlawful' low-traffic neighbourhood (LTN) after losing a High Court battle. It comes after Mr Justice Smith ruled in May that Lambeth council had ignored residents' 'legitimate concerns' about the zone in West Dulwich, south London. The judge has now rejected an appeal by the authority against the ruling, while ordering the scheme to be axed and the council to pay £35,000 in legal fees. It is the first time that an LTN, a zone where traffic is restricted in residential roads and fines are issued to unauthorised vehicles that enter the area, has been shut down by the courts. The West Dulwich Action Group (WDAG), which brought the case after claiming the street closures had increased traffic and pollution on roads bordering the zone, welcomed the ruling and called for the council to repay the £1,080,580 in fines raised through the scheme. The campaigners also said it set 'a powerful precedent' for residents locked in similar battles nationwide. A WDAG spokesman said: 'This ruling is definitive – the LTN was unlawful. The council has lost, has been denied permission to appeal, and must now face the consequences of what that means. 'At the top of that list is the £1 million in fines it issued while the unlawful scheme was in place. 'We now call on Lambeth Council to clarify whether it will refund those fines. This is not just about legality – it's about fairness and public trust. If the law was broken, the money should be paid back.' The group also urged the council not to squander any more public funds by pursuing the case further at the Court of Appeal. 'Doing so would further waste taxpayers' money and signal that its priority is protecting revenue, not engaging with the community it serves,' they added. 'Let's be clear: this case should never have gone to court. It could have been resolved through proper, respectful dialogue. Instead, Lambeth chose to defend litigation over listening – and the public has paid for it.' 'Wake-up call to councils everywhere' The WDAG statement added: 'It's a wake-up call to councils everywhere: to not impose blanket schemes ignoring genuine concerns and issues, and to work with your communities. 'We again invite Lambeth to return to the table and help co-create fairer, smarter approaches to car use, pollution, road safety, and sustainable travel – with data, community support, and clear success measures at the heart of every decision.' In a thinly veiled criticism of town hall bosses, Mr Justice Smith said in his ruling that allowing the council to 'revoke' the LTN rather than having it 'quashed' by a court ruling would fail to properly 'reflect the reality' of the battle waged by local campaigners. He wrote: 'Revoking the orders after I have made a finding of unlawfulness leaves the same impression as would an attempt to resign immediately after one has been fired.' The judge also rejected the council's attempt to defer scrapping the LTN because the local authority had 'known of the need to instruct these works to take place since May 9' when it lost the High Court case. He said an attempt by Lambeth to avoid paying all of WDAG's legal costs because the campaigners only won one of the three legal challenges was 'misconceived' because the residents had been 'wholly successful.' Legal battle 'completely successful' Mr Justice Smith wrote: 'Here the claimant came to court seeking a quashing of the [traffic] orders. It has gone away having achieved that objective. It has therefore been completely successful. 'The fact that the claimant has succeeded in only one of its three grounds of claim does not alter the fact that it has been wholly successful in its aims.' In his initial ruling in May, Mr Justice Smith found that the council was guilty of a 'serious failing' after it ignored an 'impressive' report which warned that the street closures could lead to increased congestion and pollution elsewhere in the borough.
Yahoo
15-05-2025
- Automotive
- Yahoo
I've just received two penalty notices. This war on motorists has gone far enough
If you drive around this country on a regular basis you might be forgiven for thinking that everyone in power hates cars. Whether they're running national government or local councils, it appears that if you sit behind the wheel of a vehicle you are seen as the enemy. How else to explain some of the baffling measures introduced in recent years to make driving more expensive, more difficult and a lot less fun than it used to be? Smart motorways, clean air zones, bus lanes, speed bumps, emergency gates, cycle superhighways and low traffic neighbourhoods (LTNs) have all conspired to frustrate and annoy motorists going about their daily business. But finally, there might be some light at the end of the tunnel – even if the tunnel has just acquired a new toll charge that it never used to have. For the past five years LTNs have been a battleground between local residents and campaigners all over the country. They grew up mainly as a result of Covid restrictions being put in place by over-zealous local burghers who saw restriction of travel as a silver bullet to reduce pollution. And campaigners who saw an opportunity to get people out of their cars and into – as they call it – more active forms of travel. The trouble with LTNs, though, is that they are rarely well through out. Closing off entire streets to through traffic just pushes the congestion somewhere else – usually onto main artery roads that they become permanent traffic jams pumping yet more fumes into the air. In some parts of London the battle for parking spaces, delivery van access and exemptions for disabled badge holders were painted as culture war issues pitting Net Zero zealots against entire communities who were objecting to their imposition. Now it looks as though the law has finally stepped in to bring some common sense to the discussion. Just last week the High Court ruled that Lambeth Council in South London was wrong to ignore local objections to its latest scheme. Not only that, it acted unlawfully. The council could now be forced to do away with the bollards, the planters and all the other paraphernalia that has been the bane of people's everyday lives in West Dulwich. To add insult to injury the judge in the case, Mr Justice Smith, criticised the council for ignoring a report from campaigners at the West Dulwich Action Group who highlighted the unintended consequences of the LTN. Lambeth Council say they are still measuring what the impact of the judgment will be before they decide what to do next. But residents are angry that they spent public money defending a lawsuit that they knew they couldn't win. For their part the council claims LTNs are helping them to combat climate change. Just how they're doing that is anyone's guess. The flip side of all those fines of course, in addition to effectively being an extra tax on road users in the borough, is that some businesses have been hurt, impacting the local economy. There have been similar objections raised elsewhere in the country. Business owners in Oxford have been complaining about restrictions which force people to drive ridiculously circuitous routes to get from one part of the city to another. And in Manchester the clean air zone has once again been put on ice while the pros and cons of installing it are weighed up. Taxi drivers in Newcastle are refusing to enter some parts of the city because of the cost of charges and fines. One thing is for certain, if victorious LTN challenges become the norm there will be many councils looking for more ways to raise revenue. In some areas they are installing ever more sophisticated traffic cameras that aim to catch people using their phones while driving. In the part of London where I live they've come up with an ingenious wheeze. Simply change the usage of the road at specific times. Last weekend I awoke to not one, but two penalty charge notices, for driving my car down a street that I've used for years without any problems. It turns out that it has now been designated for use by pedestrians and cyclists only during the hours of 8.30-9.15am and 3-3.45pm. Naturally the new sign explaining all this is not very easy to see and looks like it applies to a different street. That'll be £160 for each penalty notice to Southwark Council – discounted to £80 each if paid within two weeks. Of course I've appealed but I'm not holding out much hope. After all, this is a racket we're all involved in. I fear that, even if LTNs are no more, green zealots will concoct new and ever more imaginative methods of rinsing drivers. Mike Graham presents Morning Glory every weekday from 6am-10am on Talk Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Telegraph
09-05-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Labour council could be forced to axe LTN
A Labour council could be forced to scrap a controversial low traffic neighbourhood (LTN) after a High Court judge ruled its consultation about the scheme was 'unfair'. Mr Justice Smith said Lambeth council was guilty of a 'serious failing' after it ignored an 'impressive' report which warned that street closures in south London could lead to increased congestion and pollution. He also found the local authority had given a 'masterclass in selective partial reporting ' after a council document failed to record how a public consultation about the West Dulwich LTN engendered tremendous 'hostility' from local people. The West Dulwich Action Group (WDAG), which brought the case, has become the first residents' organisation to win a legal battle over an LTN. The judgment will prove hugely embarrassing for Lambeth council which claims the millions of pounds it has generated due to LTN fines is helping to fight climate change. A WDAG spokesman said: 'We are delighted with this ruling, which clearly demonstrates that Lambeth council failed to fully consider the impacts and effects of the LTN on local residents and businesses. 'It sends a clear signal to councils nationwide: communities will no longer tolerate top-down, poorly conceived schemes that ignore local input, which prioritise revenue over real solutions to issues like pollution. 'We were made to feel as though we were climate deniers standing in the way of work meant to help the planet. 'In fact, we were showing legitimate concerns that the scheme conversely added more pollution and was unfairly impacting more people than it was helping, including 6,300 school children and poorer communities living on the LTN boundaries. 'This judgment shows the LTN is unlawful and should be scrapped.' In February, the Royal Courts of Justice heard two days of legal arguments after WDAG claimed the consultation on the LTN was unfair. On Friday, Mr Justice Smith published a 34-page judgment which found the local group had proven one of three grounds in its challenge. The court heard that council staff had been given a 'wellbeing day' off after being 'left in tears' because 'angry' residents at a 2023 meeting at West Norwood Library were 'relentless' in their opposition. Mr Justice Smith concluded the session was 'not a happy event' with 'feelings against the proposals by some of those in attendance clearly running high'. He was 'less sympathetic' with the council because an official report claimed the event 'gave the local community an opportunity to look at the proposals in detail and ask any further questions'. Mr Justice Smith said that the council's consultation process was lawful, but some elements 'could undoubtedly have been improved upon'. He added that the way the council considered input from engagement with the public was unlawful. Mr Justice Smith wrote: 'The passage [in the council document] is a masterclass in selective partial reporting. It is what it does not say that renders the reporting of the event misleading.' Two-thirds against the LTN A separate survey revealed that 67.5 per cent of those who responded were either very unhappy or unhappy with the scheme. Mr Justice Smith also concluded that an 'impressive' 53-page presentation by WDAG given to the local authority 'did not form part of the council's considerations in its decision[s]' about the LTN. The document claimed traffic banned from the LTN would clog up and pollute boundary roads where often poorer communities lived. It also showed how their research had established would increase journey times, 'intensifying rather than reducing pollution'. The judgment says: 'The failure to have regard to it [the WDAG report] was a serious failing, rendering the decision to make the [traffic] Orders [to close the roads] unlawful.' Mr Justice Smith invited lawyers for both WDAG and Lambeth to make further arguments about what would be 'appropriate relief' following his judgment. Cllr Rezina Chowdhury, deputy leader of Lambeth council, said they introduced the LTN to 'reduce road danger and create a neighbourhood where residents can live safer, happier and healthier lives' and promote 'active travel'. She added: 'The court has allowed the claim against the West Dulwich Street Improvements on one of the three grounds of challenge, and dismissed the other two. We acknowledge the court's decision and are carefully considering the implications of this judgment; we will provide further updates in due course. 'The current trial scheme in West Dulwich will remain in place in the meantime, while we await further directions from the court. 'The council has done a huge amount of work, in partnership with residents throughout Lambeth, to make neighbourhoods more pleasant, and make roads safer, more vibrant, green and accessible. 'We remain fully committed to working with local communities to transform streets across the borough and getting on with our programme to deliver benefits for everyone.'
