Waldemar Avenue and Lyncroft Gardens Residents

25 September 2020

Highways Service

Perceval House, 14-16 Uxbridge Rd 

W5 2HL

Dear Sirs

Your reference: ORD 4257djc

We refer to the Loveday Road Area Low Traffic Neighbourhood the Ealing (Various Roads LTN) (No.1) Experimental Traffic Order 2020 Notice issued by the Council of the London Borough of Ealing (“Loveday Road Notice”) along with Regulation 18 of Part VI (Temporary Provisions Applicable During the Coronavirus Pandemic) of The Road Traffic (Temporary Restrictions) Procedure Regulations 1992 (SI 1992/1215, as amended by SI 2020/536 (Regulation 18) under which Ealing Council purport to provide a lawful basis for LTN30 and meet the requirements of Regulation 18. 

We note that Regulation 18(2) applies to notifications of traffic orders which can only come into force 7 days after the intention to make a traffic order has been published correctly (a “Notice”). Regulation (18(2) is specific about the requirements necessary to be contained in any Notice which are the following:  (1) the reason or purpose for the issue of the Notice (2) the effect of the Notice and the alternative route or routes available for traffic (3) the date of the Notice and (4) its maximum duration. 

We have reviewed the Loveday Road Notice (see attached) and note that the date at the bottom of the Loveday Road Notice states it is dated 26 August 020. This is not a valid date.  As we have noted above, Regulation 18(2) is specific that the date of the notice must be contained in any Notice and therefore the Loveday Road Notice is invalid because it does not comply with the requirements of Regulation 18(2) and is therefore ineffective for providing the 7 day notice required under the Regulations. 

Secondly, we refer to paragraph 2e of the Loveday Road Notice. In an effort to comply with the requirement to give details of the effect of the experimental traffic order referred to in the Loveday Road Notice, this paragraph incorrectly states that Culmington Road between Elers Road and Lammas Park Road will be closed.  Lammas Park Road will not be affected nor closed by this Experimental Traffic Order but Lammas Park Gardens will and is the correct road that should have been referred to here. As such, the Loveday Road Notice does not accurately reflect the effect of the notice, again breaching the requirements of Regulation 18(2). 

Given the matters identified above we conclude that Ealing Council has not correctly complied with the procedure for making a temporary traffic order under Section 14 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. 

We would invite you to withdraw LTN30 altogether.  We do consider that the Loveday Road Notice is invalid because it does not meet the legal requirements of a Notice and therefore needs to be  corrected and reissued and that a further 7 day notice period is required to be commenced from the date the Loveday Road Notice is correctly issued.  We are therefore putting you on notice that we are questioning the validity of the Order contained in the Loveday Road Notice

We look forward to reviewing the corrected Loveday Road Notice in due course, but it is our view that the Loveday Road Experimental Traffic Order cannot legally be implemented as proposed on Monday 28 September 2020.   We have sought legal advice on this matter and will be instructing our solicitors to act on our behalf should you not immediately halt the implementation of LTN 30.

Yours faithfully

For and on behalf of Waldemar Avenue and Lyncroft Gardens


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • Using ‘very clever legal maschinations’ sounds incredibly underhand, and is the fact that a road has been there for 200 years really a valid argument against closure to motor vehicles? Puerile tactics get us nowhere in what is a real issue that needs solving.

    Imagine if the effort expended standing on street corners, posting thousands of comments on social media, making videos, etc etc was put into constructive things across Ealing, everyone working together as a community, bringing about positive change?

    • ‘Working together’? Try working together with Ealing Council. I’ve been trying now for 16 years with remarkably little success.

      James – please explain how you might bring about this ‘working together’. I’m sure that if your plans are credible many activists would support them.

    • The fact that the roads have been there for 200 years isn’t the issue here, it’s that the Council are making changes which many of us believe will result in longer, slower journeys resulting in more pollution without consulting with the people directly impacted by the changes.

      I strongly support walking and cycling to reduce vehicle pollution and global warming but would prefer to see positive policies rather than this imposition of under-researched, punitive measures which could easily do the opposite of what is intended.

    • “Bringing about positive change” – world peace, solutions to global hunger etc is really beyond my pay grade (and really really hard) but I can influence local decisions like this.

      I see LTNs as really divisive. Is it really fair / effective to move traffic from outside my comfy large house as a white middle class middle aged man to a main road where more disadvantaged folk breathe more fumes? Say on popes lane, uxbridge road etc.

      Personally I would be happy to see a complete local ban on non-business traffic say 0730 – 1000 and 1500 – 1900 so no school run, no local commuting, no early morning doctors’ appointments for those without three current payslips as evidence of employment.

      Just a thought….

MSN Hair Awards Winning Salon

We are always working on something new so make sure to subscribe to our news updates and be the first to know. (It’s Free!)