The cyclist, broken streetlights and 25 emails

This had left a 100-metre section of the road in darkness, so he tried to have the faulty lights fixed to ensure they didn't cause an accident.

But after three months, nine more nearmisses and an exasperating exchange of more than 25 emails with officials in three different organisations, the lights are still broken.

Mr Sinclair, 32, from Herne Hill, first alerted Lambeth council to the problem in an email on 30 October.

An official replied the lights were the responsibility of Transport for London and so forwarded the message to them.

Then a TfL contractor emailed Mr Sinclair, denying the organisation was responsible, and passed the problem onto Westminster council.

Days later, Westminster emailed him to say it too had investigated and concluded the lights were not its either. In fact, they belonged to Lambeth after all.

Mr Sinclair, a corporate finance worker who cycles to his office near Regent's Park, said: "Since October I have been emailing, phoning, filling in forms and speaking to engineers almost every day and still it is pitch dark in the middle of Waterloo Bridge. What am I meant to do next? This bridge is a danger."

Today, Lambeth insisted the lights were TfL's responsibility but TfL denied this.

Finally, Westminster admitted it was to blame. Transportation director Martin Low said: "To complete this essential maintenance work a traffic management order is required to close off part of the road, which involves getting permission from TfL and the police. We are awaiting confirmation from them to enable our engineers to carry out this work next Tuesday. We sincerely apologise for the length of time this has taken."

THREE-MONTH BATTLE

30 October - Mr Sinclair emails Lambeth council about faulty lights. His complaint is sent on to officials including Richard Godfrey and Raj Bami. Mr Bami emails complaint to Malcolm Honor at Transport for London. Mr Honor tells John Carmen (of TfL contractor Ringway Jacobs) to forward email to Westminster council, saying it is not TfL's responsibility.

1 November - Mr Carmen emails Mr Sinclair to say he has emailed Westminster and it will deal with the issue within three hours. Mr Godfrey emails him, saying responsibility rests with TfL. He refers original email to TfL. Mr Sinclair acknowledges this message, mentioning Westminster's involvement. Mr Godfrey replies that he is happy the matter is resolved.

2 November - TfL emails Mr Sinclair saying it will officially respond to his email within 15 days.

6 November - Mr Sinclair emails Mr Carmen, Mr Godfrey and Alan Trigg at TfL saying the lights are still broken. Laura Cressey of Ringway Jacobs replies that Westminster has said it will investigate and sort the issue "today". Mr Godfrey replies that he has reminded Westminster but it now says the lights are Lambeth's responsibility. Gemma Jacobs of TfL emails to apologise for the confusion and says responsibility lies with Westminster. This email is copied to Westminster.

7 November - Automated email from TfL says it will respond to original email within 15 days.

8 November - Martin Sachs, Lambeth's head of transport and highways, insists TfL is responsible.

27 November - Mr Sinclair replies, saying the lights are still broken. Mr Honor says the lights are Westminster's but three broken lights at the IMAX roundabout at the end of the bridge are TfL's and he has asked for them to be fixed. Another automated email arrives from TfL.

4 December - Mr Sinclair logs on to Westminster website to submit broken street light report. Highways technician Steve Denny replies the lights will be fixed that weekend. They aren't.

15 December - Mr Sinclair submits another broken street light report online. No reply is received. He complains directly to Westminster.

24 January - Lights still not fixed. Mr Sinclair submits a third report. Technician James Robertson replies the lights will be fixed by the month end.

4 February - Mr Sinclair calls Westminster to check progress but is told to re-submit request.

5 February - Lights still out of action.