3. Ealing alleged traffic contravention of 32JD
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic: Ealing alleged traffic contravention of 32JD  (Read 1797 times)

0 Members and 1004 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Ealing alleged traffic contravention of 32JD
« Reply #15 on: »
The blue signs are mandator route signs. The problem is that normally you'd expect them to be used in a segregated lane, such as here: https://maps.app.goo.gl/k8rqvJ71KXyG2u8F9
Logged
I practice law in the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, London Tribunals, the First-tier tribunal for Scotland, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for Northern Ireland, but I am not a solicitor or a barrister. Notwithstanding this, I voluntarily apply the cab rank rule. I am a member of the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends, my membership number is FM193 and I abide by the SPMF service standards.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order
Re: Ealing alleged traffic contravention of 32JD
« Reply #16 on: »
I totally agree.

Are there any important points I should consider making in my representation that may favour an overturning of the penalty charge notice?
Logged
Re: Ealing alleged traffic contravention of 32JD
« Reply #17 on: »
I can draft a technical challenge if you want, basically we can try and catch the council out for failing to consider supporting evidence.
Logged
I practice law in the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, London Tribunals, the First-tier tribunal for Scotland, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for Northern Ireland, but I am not a solicitor or a barrister. Notwithstanding this, I voluntarily apply the cab rank rule. I am a member of the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends, my membership number is FM193 and I abide by the SPMF service standards.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order
Re: Ealing alleged traffic contravention of 32JD
« Reply #18 on: »
That would be amazing kind sir. Between council’s viciously raising revenue through the aggressive issue of PCN’s and APCOA parking refusing to issue NHS staff with staff parking permits in a timely manner (if at all!), I am finding myself with an increasing number of grey hairs and an unwanted receding hairline!

You all really are angels to the general public that find themselves helpless in these situations.

Thank you
Logged
Re: Ealing alleged traffic contravention of 32JD
« Reply #19 on: »
Out of interest is there any rule that a blue arrow has to be used in a segregated lane?
Logged
Re: Ealing alleged traffic contravention of 32JD
« Reply #20 on: »

The road marking of an arrow to the left, right or straight on is advisory. However, when accompanied by a marking stating right turn or whatever (as GSV shows here)it becomes compulsory.

OP, don't risk the discount on arguing the contravention itself.Even if you were forced into this lane then you were obliged to turn right, you cannot take it upon yourself to go your own way.
Logged
Re: Ealing alleged traffic contravention of 32JD
« Reply #21 on: »
Thanks. My understanding is you don’t lose the discount by submitting a representation so maybe it’s worth trying in the initial phase. Am I correct?
Logged
Re: Ealing alleged traffic contravention of 32JD
« Reply #22 on: »
Quote from: cp8759 on September 26, 2023, 10:20:02 pm
I can draft a technical challenge if you want, basically we can try and catch the council out for failing to consider supporting evidence.

@cp8759 I look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience.

Thanks again for your all your support everyone.
Logged
Re: Ealing alleged traffic contravention of 32JD
« Reply #23 on: »
That is correct, Ealing usually reoffers the discount so you might as well have a go.

Draft challenge:

Dear London Borough of Ealing,

I challenge liability for PCN EA58950783 on the ground that the alleged contravention did not occur. In order to create an enforceable restriction, the council is required to provide segregated lanes, otherwise there is no impediment to a motorist lawfully switching lanes at any time (as this is not prohibited).

An example of a correct layout is found for instance on Filton Road in Bristol, I refer you to the images at LINK1 LINK2 and LINK3 which illustrate the point.

At the location captured by your camera, there are no restrictions or prohibitions on vehicles changing lane at any stage, nor can the turn right arrow embedded into the traffic light array have the effect you think it does: if it did, then all traffic including traffic in the left-hand lane would be required to turn right.

In the circumstances, the alleged contravention did not occur.

Yours faithfully,

I will PM you some links to put in the representation, they will redirect to https://imgur.com/a/ncZLWjw https://imgur.com/a/5rObDyZ and https://imgur.com/a/us9bIvv but if you give them the links I'll PM you, we can use the click count to confirm whether they've looked at them or not (obviously do not click on the links I PM you as we want the click count to remain at zero). If they don't click on them, we can then prove they've failed to consider all of the evidence. If they say in the rejection that they've considered all the evidence, we've got them for lying as well.
« Last Edit: October 02, 2023, 09:44:30 pm by cp8759 »
Logged
I practice law in the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, London Tribunals, the First-tier tribunal for Scotland, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for Northern Ireland, but I am not a solicitor or a barrister. Notwithstanding this, I voluntarily apply the cab rank rule. I am a member of the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends, my membership number is FM193 and I abide by the SPMF service standards.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order
Re: Ealing alleged traffic contravention of 32JD
« Reply #24 on: »
Thanks so much. I’m presuming I select the ‘ground for representation’:

‘There was no contravention of a prescribed Order/failure to comply with an indication on a sign/contravention of a lorry ban order (2)’?

I don’t believe any of the other ‘grounds for representation’ fit the case.
Logged
Re: Ealing alleged traffic contravention of 32JD
« Reply #25 on: »
Quote from: Doctordoctor on September 30, 2023, 06:41:42 am
Thanks so much. I’m presuming I select the ‘ground for representation’:

‘There was no contravention of a prescribed Order/failure to comply with an indication on a sign/contravention of a lorry ban order (2)’?
Yes.
Logged
I practice law in the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, London Tribunals, the First-tier tribunal for Scotland, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for Northern Ireland, but I am not a solicitor or a barrister. Notwithstanding this, I voluntarily apply the cab rank rule. I am a member of the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends, my membership number is FM193 and I abide by the SPMF service standards.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order
Re: Ealing alleged traffic contravention of 32JD
« Reply #26 on: »
Am I ok to click the links in your post above without clicking the links in your private message to avoid disturbing the click count?
Logged
Re: Ealing alleged traffic contravention of 32JD
« Reply #27 on: »
Quote from: Doctordoctor on October 01, 2023, 11:58:52 am
Am I ok to click the links in your post above without clicking the links in your private message to avoid disturbing the click count?
Yes.
Logged
I practice law in the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, London Tribunals, the First-tier tribunal for Scotland, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for Northern Ireland, but I am not a solicitor or a barrister. Notwithstanding this, I voluntarily apply the cab rank rule. I am a member of the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends, my membership number is FM193 and I abide by the SPMF service standards.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order
Re: Ealing alleged traffic contravention of 32JD
« Reply #28 on: »
Hi @cp8759,

Could you please check the last sentence of the draft representation.

‘At the location captured by your camera, there are no restrictions or prohibitions on vehicles changing lane at any stage, nor can the turn left arrow embedded into the traffic light array have the effect you think it does: if it did, then all traffic including traffic in the left-hand lane would be required to turn right.‘

Did you mean to say ‘…nor can the turn RIGHT arrow embedded into the traffic light array…’

Also is it possible to add to the grounds for representation by saying ‘that the signs embedded on the traffic lights affecting the proposed offending vehicle are not shown in your evidence and the vehicle is therefore not subject to penalty given the evidence you have provided’?

The video evidence only shows the front of the vehicle, but not the sign on the traffic light that the vehicle crossed. The lights could say absolutely anything!!

I look forward to your advice as this may have an effect on all PCN’s issued at this junction as, it would seem, all PCN’s were likely issued based on this camera as evidence.

Thanks again for your time.
Logged
Re: Ealing alleged traffic contravention of 32JD
« Reply #29 on: »
Quote from: Doctordoctor on October 02, 2023, 06:53:07 pm
Did you mean to say ‘…nor can the turn RIGHT arrow embedded into the traffic light array…’
Yes, I have fixed that now.

Quote from: Doctordoctor on October 02, 2023, 06:53:07 pm
Also is it possible to add to the grounds for representation by saying ‘that the signs embedded on the traffic lights affecting the proposed offending vehicle are not shown in your evidence and the vehicle is therefore not subject to penalty given the evidence you have provided’?
No, that is not a ground of appeal.

Quote from: Doctordoctor on October 02, 2023, 06:53:07 pm
The video evidence only shows the front of the vehicle, but not the sign on the traffic light that the vehicle crossed. The lights could say absolutely anything!!
They could, but the council will have library photos showing what they actually show.
Logged
I practice law in the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, London Tribunals, the First-tier tribunal for Scotland, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for Northern Ireland, but I am not a solicitor or a barrister. Notwithstanding this, I voluntarily apply the cab rank rule. I am a member of the Society of Professional McKenzie Friends, my membership number is FM193 and I abide by the SPMF service standards.

Quote from: 'Gumph' date='Thu, 19 Jan 2023 - 10:23'
cp8759 is, indeed, a Wizard of the First Order
Pages: 1 [2] 3
« previous next »
  3. Ealing alleged traffic contravention of 32JD