Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hi, I received a PCN through the post about stopping in a box junction even though I thought I cleared it.

Is this worth appealing or have they got me bang to rights here?

I couldnt concentrate because my kids were low on blood sugar and doing my nut (we've all been there right?)

contravention 31 on the 25th May in Waltham Forest

Yeah, we'll need to see the video (which we can do with the PCN details) to give proper advice.

If you are only marginally in the box, a statutory defence is that you could have simply moved forward if you'd known you were still inside (this depends on you leaving some gap in front).

I'll take a look once the PCN is uploaded.

Hmmm, you are only in the box to a minimal extent, but it looks like you pretty much pulled forward up to the car in front (albeit it's difficult to be sure from the camera angle).

Basically, if you can convince an adjudicator you could have moved forward another foot or two, then you should prevail.  But if not, they may decide it's a technical contravention.

You may also get an adjudicator who is feeling generous and decides it's only de minimis.

I note in the video you open the car door and look back to check if you've cleared the box junction.  What was your opinion at the time?  That you'd sufficiently cleared it, or that you hadn't, but couldn't move any further forward?

Ultimately, you'll need to decide if you can credibly claim you had enough space to move forward sufficiently to clear the box junction.

If so, that should be a win.  If not, I think this would fail at adjudication.

You could still submit representations within the discount period and see what comes back from Waltham Forest.  Does the PCN confirm they'll reoffer the discount if they reject a challenge submitted in the first 14 days?  Most councils do this.

You don't necessarily have to prove it. It's Waltham Forest's job to convince an adjudicator on balance of probabilities that you couldn't.

Do you know how long your vehicle is (to the centimetre)?  There's something that looks like a manhole cover on the road just to the right of the front end of your vehicle.  I think the vehicle in front has completely cleared that, and according to google maps distance measurer, the front of the manhole is about 5.6 metres from the edge of the box junction.  The rear of the manhole cover is about 4.4 metres from the box junction.

I'd be surprised if your vehicle is over 4.5 metres long so we ought to be able to establish sufficient doubt!

If you pause the vehicle in front as it just clears the box junction, the front of it is also clearly behind the front of the manhole cover which adds weight to the argument yours would have been too.  It looks to be similar in length to your own.

Combined with this, when you come to your eventual resting point (after you've opened the door to look back), you are only in the box to a very limited extent (your rear wheels seem to be resting on the boundary line).  WF may say you originally stopped further back, but that doesn't matter as the car in front of you doesn't move over this period so you could always have moved forward at least as far as you eventually did.

Chance of council accepting your representations is almost zero no matter how much detail you put in. But nothing lost in showing your working up front, and will make any future appeal a bit easier.

If you have a first go, I'm happy to brush it up.

Thanks - I've redrafted a little bit.  See what you think.


Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to formally appeal the above Penalty Charge Notice issued to my vehicle on 25/05/2026 at 10:48 on Forest Road E17 / Kingsley Road E17. I believe this PCN was issued incorrectly and request that it be cancelled for the following reason: the contravention did not occur.

A box junction contravention can only occur when there is insufficient space beyond the box junction to receive the vehicle.  This is because the contravention is defined based on the situation where a vehicle has to stop within the box junction due to the presence of stationary vehicles.

Upon my approach to the box junction, I judged that there was sufficient receiving space for my vehicle and stopped when I believed I had cleared the box.  As the video footage shows, I opened my door briefly to look back and check and saw that my rear wheels were still marginally in the box and so I moved forward a little more such that I believed I had cleared the box completely.

The video footage shows that after this my vehicle remained in the box to a de minimis extent (back wheels resting on the box extremities). Even if this level of incursion is not considered de minimis, for the reasons set out below, I am confident there was sufficient space between my vehicle and the one in front that I could have moved forward to clear it completely had I opted to and thus no contravention was committed.

There is what looks like a manhole cover on the road just to the right of the front end of my vehicle.  The stationary vehicle in front of my own had completely cleared that, and according to google maps distance measurer, the front of the manhole is about 5.6 metres from the front edge of the box junction.  The rear of the manhole cover is about 4.4 metres from the box junction.

My vehicle (2018 Mini Countryman) is 4.11m long so on this basis the front of my vehicle would be completely behind the manhole cover at the point it just clears the box junction, and thus could have moved forward and still been over a metre behind the vehicle in front.

Further, if you pause the video around 10 seconds in when the vehicle in front of my Mini (a Nissan Note, also 4.11m long) has itself just cleared the box junction, the front of it is also clearly entirely behind the manhole cover which further strengthens the conclusion that my vehicle would have been too.

On that basis I trust you will cancel the PCN.

Yours faithfully,