Croydon Mayor Perry uses a legal objection to stop a residents’ group from having their day in court. By STEVEN DOWNES
Open roads: Croydon’s LTN schemes will stay in place
A case claiming that Croydon’s Low Traffic Neighbourhood schemes are an unlawful cash-cow, taxing motorists who fail to follow road signs, has been thrown out by a High Court judge.
None of the legal arguments assembled for the shadowy group Open Our Roads got to be presented in court, because their lawyers failed to follow important procedural guidelines in submitting their evidence to the council’s counsel in time.
Had the case been heard and Croydon Council lost, Mayor Jason Perry faced the prospect of losing more than £10million a year in income from traffic fines generated by the borough’s six now permanent LTNs.
The case brought by Open Our Roads hinged on whether Perry was telling the truth in his 2022 election campaign when he promised to remove all Croydon’s LTNs “on Day One” (how very Trumpian), and whether that politician’s promise to the electorate was a binding contract.
It is unconfirmed, but it has been suggested that this is the first time that a legal case involving Croydon Council has reached the High Court and the council has not lost since the hapless Stephen Lawrence-Orumwense was appointed Borough Solicitor.
Low Traffic Neighbourhoods were introduced from 2020 initially as a response to covid, with grant funding from Boris Johnson’s government, to encourage walking and cycling and to reduce rat-running by speeding cars through residential streets.
Pandering to the road haulage and motoring lobby during the 2022 election campaign, pro-cars, pro-pollution Perry said, “These LTN schemes have increased levels of traffic and congestion, increased journey times, increased pollution, impacted on business and fined residents for driving on their own roads… These schemes are having a huge detrimental impact on our communities.”
Open Our Roads – which received funding from a leading figure in the Association of Bad Drivers, based in faraway Chislehurst – initially campaigned against LTNs in the Crystal Palace and South Norwood areas. Although the organisation raised more than £10,000 in crowdfunders in its early days, for this Judicial Review they used barristers from Thomas More Chambers on a pro bono basis.
Weak evidence: OOR’s case depended heavily on reports in a Tory newspaper
The case was brought in the name of one OOR member, Karen Lawrence, claiming that the council had misused their powers under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 in respect of revenue generation.
OOR issued a statement today saying: “The High Court declined to hear any substantive evidence and dismissed the claim brought by a member of OpenOurRoads, allowing the six Low Traffic Neighbourhood (LTN) schemes to remain in place.
“The High Court dismissed the claim on technical procedural grounds, raised by the council lawyers just one week before the final hearing.
“The judge did not consider the merits of the claim which focused on the council using the LTN as a revenue-generating scheme. The argument that the LTNs achieve no meaningful environmental benefits has also not been considered by the court…”
“While we are disappointed by the outcome, we remain proud of the case we brought forward. The evidence we were prevented from putting in front of the court — including public admissions by Croydon’s Mayor about the financial motivations behind the schemes — raised serious questions about the true purpose of these LTNs.”
OOR say that their lawyers are considering grounds for appeal.
Read more: #TheLabourFiles: Source of hacked data worked for Evans
Read more: Removal of LTNs was unnecessary says cycling campaign
Read more: The next battle in the culture wars? Traffic bollards
Read more: London’s toxic air is ‘a public health emergency’ says charity
A D V E R T I S E M E N T
PAID ADS: To advertise your services or products to our 10,000 weekday visitors to the site, as featured on Google News Showcase, email us inside.croydon@btinternet.com for our unbeatable ad rates
- If you have a news story about life in or around Croydon, or want to publicise your residents’ association or business, or if you have a local event to promote, please email us with full details at inside.croydon@btinternet.com
As featured on Google News Showcase
- Our comments section on every report provides all readers with an immediate “right of reply” on all our content. Our comments policy can be read by clicking here
Inside Croydon is a member of the Independent Community News Network
Open our Roads said Perry was only keeping LTNs for the money. Pot. Kettle. They should now tell us and their donors what happened to all that money that they were given between December 2020 and February 2021.
Their crowdfunding page (https://www.crowdfunder.co.uk/p/open-our-roads-legal-justice-fund) said “To date, our legal groundwork has come for free through volunteer lawyers, who will continue to contribute to standard legal work. We’ve paid no costs except the court application fee. Now, we need specialist representation, expertise, and funds for any activities and costs associated with the legal proceedings.”
“Pro bono” is a Latin term that means “for the public good.” In a legal context, it refers to professional work undertaken voluntarily and without payment, typically by lawyers providing services to individuals or organizations that cannot afford to pay for legal representation
As they didn’t pay Thomas More Chambers a penny, Open our Roads should therefore publish a detailed breakdown of expenditure, and if there’s any money left, explain how they’ll give it back. That’s if they don’t want their supporters to think that they’ve been ripped off by some shady characters. After all, it’s not as if some of the people behind the campaign aren’t a bit dodgy, e.g. https://insidecroydon.com/2022/10/25/thelabourfiles-source-of-hacked-data-worked-for-evans/
Open our Roads? Open your Books!
Can somebody smell astroturf?
It sounds like incompetence if Open our Roads didn’t get their evidence in to the other side on time.
On the basic issue LTNs should be judged on their merits from the point of view of the environment and safety, but the amount of money they raise in fines should not come into it.
A rare bit of (legal) good news for Croydon Council………..!