A LANDMARK ruling that said Mersey Gateway tolls were illegal was contested in an appeal hearing lodged by Halton Council.

The appeal comes after the Traffic Penalty Tribunal (TPT) ruled that the controversial tolls did not comply with the Transport Act 2000, because Halton Council had not specified the exact price of the tolls clearly in their Road User Charging Order Scheme (RUSCO), which enforces the tolls.

The transport watchdog also ruled that the bridge– which has a cashless toll system – did not have adequate signage informing motorists how and when to pay the tolls.

On Tuesday a legal representative on behalf of Halton council contested both of those arguments in a review of the TPT’s decision, which was heard by an independent adjudicator.

One of the main points of contention was whether clear signage was a legal requirement in order to enforce the tolls and consequent penalty charge notices for not paying them.

A legal representative on behalf of the council argued that you wouldn’t escape liability for driving 100mph because there’s no signs telling you not to, and consequently there was no grounds for appealing the tolls.

He said motorists using the bridge should comply with the law and ‘if the law states there is a charge then that must be paid’.

The independent adjudicator said he will review both sides and make a decision in writing, but did not indicate when.

He compared the situation to using public transport, arguing that there are no signs on a bus telling you that you have to pay for a ticket, but you do so anyway.

However an independent advocate to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, Barrister Ms Ruth Stockley, argued that even though there was no statutory requirement to have adequate signage, the need for it was implied in order for the RUSCO to be effectively enforced.

Ms Stockely said: “If there is no signage the whole scheme is unreasonable in practice as as it is not reasonable to expect a motorist to research whether there are road charges in place before making the journey.”

The second point of contention was whether the council had specified the price of the tolls clearly in the RUSCO.

The RUSCO that was initially contested by the TPT did not state the exact price of the charge and only specified a range- for example £0-£2.50.

The council’s legal representative argued that specifying a range was still being specific and that this gave room for any changes they would have to make to pricing due to inflation.

That RUSCO has since been updated to specify the exact price of the tolls, however Ms Stockely ruled that for the RUSCO to be specific, it should have stated the exact price of the tolls.

She said that although that mistake did not challenge the validity of the Charging Order Scheme it did question it’s enforceability.

All current appeals against Penalty Charge Notices are on hold until a final decision is made.

A spokesperson from Mersey Gateway said that it is “business as usual” on the Mersey Gateway Bridge.

The spokesperson said: “The new Charging Order that came into effect on the 19th April 2018 now regulates tolling on Mersey Gateway, so it is very much business as usual today and it’s really important that everyone pays their toll charges to avoid the risk of getting a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN).

“Today’s hearing was only about five cases under the earlier Order which has now been superseded. We’re pleased that today’s review hearing has taken place and that we have had the opportunity to clearly explain our case. We look forward to receiving the review adjudicator’s decision when published.”