Author Topic: Penalty charge notice - Brent Council - Contravention 31 - Yellow box Kingsbury Road/Berkeley Road junction  (Read 2658 times)

0 Members and 666 Guests are viewing this topic.

I entered a yellow box and decided to stop to allow cars out from the side road, onto the main road. I could have carried on driving as the road has 2 lanes, but you can see from the video that it would have been a bit tricky. I am unable to upload the video to this post, but please follow this link: https://brent.tarantoportal.com/PCN/
You can enter the PCN number: BT21227033 Reg: A21YVA. My car is the black SUV behind the maroon car in the left lane. I would like to know if I should/can appeal this, and if so, how to present the appeal. The matter is a little time sensitive so I would greatly appreciate all the help I can get! Many thanks in advance :)

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


Hopefully this link to the video works



I've been liaising with this member since she posted her case on the Facebook page.

In my opinion, the car didn't have to stop within the box due to stationary vehicles.  The road moves from two lanes to one after the box junction.  There was always space on the other side of the box junction to accommodate a vehicle and she seems to stop to see if the car in the other lane will take the space, not because she has to.  Thereafter the cars in the side road seize their opportunity to move across the box junction.  None of these block in the OP due to being stationary.  Therefore, I don't think a contravention is made out.  Keen for others' thoughts though.

The box also seems to extend unnecessarily beyond the side road, but probably not so much an adjudicator would find fault with it.

OP tomorrow is the last day of the discount so depending on other responses, I'll help you draft some representations.  But, to manage your expectations, it's extremely rare for a council to accept even the most compelling of representations, they prefer to game the system and reject all arguments forcing you to either settle at the discounted rate or take your chance at the tribunal by which time the discount has expired.  But if you get your reps in by tomorrow, most councils reoffer the discount at the point they issue the notice of rejection.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2024, 10:53:36 pm by MrChips »

Hmm, I do have my doubts on whether this is a valid appeal argument, because the red car in front of the OP's car moves forward and stops in the space beyond the YBJ. The OP's car moves off after it, but stops to let cars cross from the side road, but would have had to stopped anyway because there was no exit space. A gamble at adjudication, I think.

The red car pulls over to the kerb and seems to park at the side of the road (checking map perhaps?).  At that point, any normal driver approaching from behind would not wait indefinitely behind it but assume they need to overtake and aim for the outside lane which is vacant and available for the OP throughout.

The road beyond the junction is full of parked cars anyway so the OP would have been moving to the right hand lane as she crossed the junction anyway.

On balance I don't think the OP entered in such a way that she had to stop because of that red vehicle.  Looks to me that she chose to stop.  I think had she been minded to (and perhaps more assertive), she could have gone straight across and taken that vacant space.

OK.I suspect the council won't give way, so it will be up to the adjudicator, whether he penalises courtesy or not.
Lets hope it's not "Never let a good deed go unpunished"

Suggested representations (need to be emailed to Brent today).  There is a 99% chance Brent will reject these representations, in which case your options will be to either pay £65 or go to the tribunal where the PCN is either cancelled or you have to pay £130.  Personally I think your odds are better than 50% at tribunal but I can't give any guarantees as it's a subjective decision.

Dear London Borough of Brent

Re PCN BT21227033

I received the above PCN recently relating to stopping in a box junction and wish to submit representations on the grounds that the contravention did not occur.

A contravention with respect to a box junction occurs if a driver causes a vehicle to enter the box junction so that the vehicle has to stop [my emphasis] within the box junction due to the presence of stationary vehicles.  Having viewed the video evidence supplied, I contend that the circumstances of my stop in the box junction are not consistent with a contravention having occurred.

Just beyond the box junction, the road changes from two lanes to one due to, first, a disabled parking bay on the left, and then, immediately beyond that, a pedestrian crossing.  On the approach to the box junction, there is a white 'filter right' arrow painted on the carriageway instructing drivers to aim for the right hand lane. As such the natural manoeuvre for a driver crossing the box junction in the left hand lane is to direct their vehicle towards the exit in the right hand lane. This is particularly true in the circumstances shown in the video as a red car seeks to park up behind the disabled bay, thereby additionally filtering all traffic to the right at the exit of the box junction.

The video clearly shows this exit to the box junction was always clear and, as such, at no time was I forced to stop due to the presence of stationary vehicles - which is a necessary condition for a contravention to occur.  Had I been minded to, or perhaps more assertive and less willing to give way, I could have moved forward and completely cleared the box by simply pulling up behind the white car on the other side of the box.  That I didn't do this seems to be because I initially hesitated, conscious that the lanes were merging and there was another car slightly behind me and to my right.  The cars in the side road then took this as a cue that I was giving way and began to move across my path.  While there was sufficient space to accommodate my vehicle beyond the box, due to the level of traffic ahead I decided there was little benefit in moving forward at this point and let four cars out of the side road.  However, these vehicles were never stationary and so are not in the scope of the box junction contravention.  Once traffic beyond the junction started to ease and there was a sufficient gap in the flow of traffic emerging from the side road I then moved forward and out of the box junction.

On this basis I encourage you to review the video evidence and, having done so, I trust you will see fit to cancel the PCN.

Kind regards,


I would add:

I also make a collateral challenge that the PCN is unenforceable because the second sentence in the paragraph under the photos - the one in parenthesis - mentions the date of service which contradicts the previous sentence concerning payment from the date of the notice. This creates confusion and ambiguity.

Hold fire:  where is the rest of the PCN as it may have another issue? It really is important to use the scattergun approach as they must consider.
« Last Edit: February 21, 2024, 12:37:48 pm by Hippocrates »
I REGRET THAT, FOR THE PRESENT, I AM UNABLE TO TAKE ON ANY MORE CASES AS A REPRESENTATIVE AT THE LONDON TRIBUNALS. THIS IS FOR BOTH PERSONAL AND LEGAL REASONS. PLEASE DO NOT PM ME UNLESS YOU HAVE POSTED YOUR THREAD ON THE FORUM AND I WILL ATTEMPT TO GIVE ADVICE.


If you do not challenge, you join "The Mugged Club".

cp8759 and mrmustard are true geniuses. I know my place in the hierarchy of The Three Musketeers. 😊 "The Clinician", "The Gentleman" and "The Showman"

There are "known knowns" which we may never have wished to know. This applies to them. But in the field the idea that there are also "unknown unknowns" doesn't apply as they hide in the aleatoric lottery. I know this is true and need to be prepared knowing the "unknown unknowns" may well apply.

To Socrates from "Hippocrates"

Thank you for all your help! I have submitted the appeal and will let you know the outcome! :)

I advised you to wait. What did you write and where is the rest of the PCN please.
I REGRET THAT, FOR THE PRESENT, I AM UNABLE TO TAKE ON ANY MORE CASES AS A REPRESENTATIVE AT THE LONDON TRIBUNALS. THIS IS FOR BOTH PERSONAL AND LEGAL REASONS. PLEASE DO NOT PM ME UNLESS YOU HAVE POSTED YOUR THREAD ON THE FORUM AND I WILL ATTEMPT TO GIVE ADVICE.


If you do not challenge, you join "The Mugged Club".

cp8759 and mrmustard are true geniuses. I know my place in the hierarchy of The Three Musketeers. 😊 "The Clinician", "The Gentleman" and "The Showman"

There are "known knowns" which we may never have wished to know. This applies to them. But in the field the idea that there are also "unknown unknowns" doesn't apply as they hide in the aleatoric lottery. I know this is true and need to be prepared knowing the "unknown unknowns" may well apply.

To Socrates from "Hippocrates"

The OP messaged me yesterday, she believes that was the entirety of the PCN but isn't a position to double check until the weekend.  Given the discount expired yesterday she had to submit based on what she had (including your additional paragraph).  If any further wording issues come to light they can be included in the subsequent appeal.

She should make an addendum so they must consider.
I REGRET THAT, FOR THE PRESENT, I AM UNABLE TO TAKE ON ANY MORE CASES AS A REPRESENTATIVE AT THE LONDON TRIBUNALS. THIS IS FOR BOTH PERSONAL AND LEGAL REASONS. PLEASE DO NOT PM ME UNLESS YOU HAVE POSTED YOUR THREAD ON THE FORUM AND I WILL ATTEMPT TO GIVE ADVICE.


If you do not challenge, you join "The Mugged Club".

cp8759 and mrmustard are true geniuses. I know my place in the hierarchy of The Three Musketeers. 😊 "The Clinician", "The Gentleman" and "The Showman"

There are "known knowns" which we may never have wished to know. This applies to them. But in the field the idea that there are also "unknown unknowns" doesn't apply as they hide in the aleatoric lottery. I know this is true and need to be prepared knowing the "unknown unknowns" may well apply.

To Socrates from "Hippocrates"

If that is the entirety of the PCN, do you have any further points to include?

If that is the entirety of the PCN, do you have any further points to include?

It can't be because the page with the grounds is missing.
I REGRET THAT, FOR THE PRESENT, I AM UNABLE TO TAKE ON ANY MORE CASES AS A REPRESENTATIVE AT THE LONDON TRIBUNALS. THIS IS FOR BOTH PERSONAL AND LEGAL REASONS. PLEASE DO NOT PM ME UNLESS YOU HAVE POSTED YOUR THREAD ON THE FORUM AND I WILL ATTEMPT TO GIVE ADVICE.


If you do not challenge, you join "The Mugged Club".

cp8759 and mrmustard are true geniuses. I know my place in the hierarchy of The Three Musketeers. 😊 "The Clinician", "The Gentleman" and "The Showman"

There are "known knowns" which we may never have wished to know. This applies to them. But in the field the idea that there are also "unknown unknowns" doesn't apply as they hide in the aleatoric lottery. I know this is true and need to be prepared knowing the "unknown unknowns" may well apply.

To Socrates from "Hippocrates"

I REGRET THAT, FOR THE PRESENT, I AM UNABLE TO TAKE ON ANY MORE CASES AS A REPRESENTATIVE AT THE LONDON TRIBUNALS. THIS IS FOR BOTH PERSONAL AND LEGAL REASONS. PLEASE DO NOT PM ME UNLESS YOU HAVE POSTED YOUR THREAD ON THE FORUM AND I WILL ATTEMPT TO GIVE ADVICE.


If you do not challenge, you join "The Mugged Club".

cp8759 and mrmustard are true geniuses. I know my place in the hierarchy of The Three Musketeers. 😊 "The Clinician", "The Gentleman" and "The Showman"

There are "known knowns" which we may never have wished to know. This applies to them. But in the field the idea that there are also "unknown unknowns" doesn't apply as they hide in the aleatoric lottery. I know this is true and need to be prepared knowing the "unknown unknowns" may well apply.

To Socrates from "Hippocrates"

Hi, this is the other page

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]