Free Traffic Legal Advice

Appeal has been lodged on the Tribunal website.

The letters from the tribunal are just templates and don't really mean much.

In practice, the tribunal gives appellants up to two reschedules, no questions asked, and you can actually upload evidence as late as the day of the hearing.

This being the case, just want and see what the council does. If they don't upload anything at all, you win by default. If they upload their evidence when you only have a few days left (I've seen them upload evidence as late as the day before), just phone the tribunal call centre and ask to reschedule the hearing, you can push it back by up to 28 days and they'll do that while you're on the phone. You then have a month to prepare for the hearing.

In the good old days cases were won when the appellant did not receive the evidence less than 3 days before.

Always best to bat second:  RBK filed nom evidence a few weeks ago and DNCed.  No point in filing evdience against a case which does not exist.

Missed out these important pages.




They do mention location but believe we've not been misled and we know where it is!
Also, we never contested the contravention code. I reckon they cut and paste rubbish from one case to another.

Bit of a brain dump to kick things off

The location stated on the PCN is vague. Xxx states that the location needs to be self evident Cambridge Park is almost a kilometre long with several road junctions. An internet search for Cambridge Park is more likely to bring up Cambridge City Park and Ride.
A search for Cambridge Park Blake Hall Road leads you to the right junction.

The YBJ extends beyond the bounds of the intersection of the two roads. Previous case 2230099245 in which Mr Styles agrees. Also, 2230267259 Mr Harman agrees the box extends beyond the junction.
The Council’s own evidence (YBJ Construction Drawing) clearly shows the box extending metres beyond the confines of the junction where the two roads intersect. Extended lines from the kerbs of each road define a much smaller area.

The set back of the stop line in Blake Hall Road makes it impossible to see the extent of traffic in Cambridge Park and the end of the YBJ.
The traffic filtering left from Cambridge Park into Blake Hall Road is a distraction and obscures the view of the exit after you pass the stop line. On passing the stop line there was a cyclist stationary inside the YBJ, giving the impression they are outside the YBJ.

The vehicle in front had completed its right turn and had exited the intersection of Cambridge Park and Blake Hall Road giving the impression that the exit was clear.
Even the professional driver behind has made a poor decision to enter their bus into the YBJ.
The driver entered the YBJ from Blake Hall Road to turn right into Cambridge Park

The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions (TSRGD) 2016 states.
Box junctions – diagram 1043
 11.—(1) Subject to sub-paragraphs (2), (3) and (4), the marking provided for at item 25 of the table in Part 6 (“a diagram 1043 marking”) conveys the prohibition that a person must not cause a vehicle to enter the box junction so that the vehicle has to stop within the box junction due to the presence of stationary vehicles.
(2) Subject to sub-paragraph (4) the diagram 1043 marking when placed so as to be a box junction within paragraph (c) of the definition of that expression conveys the prohibition that a person must not cause a vehicle to enter the box junction so that the vehicle has to stop within the box junction due to the presence of oncoming vehicles or other stationary vehicles beyond the box junction.
(3) The prohibition in sub-paragraph (1) does not, in respect of a box junction within paragraph (
a) of the definition of that expression, apply to a person who— (a) causes a vehicle to enter the box junction for the purpose of turning right; and
(b) stops the vehicle within the box junction for so long as the vehicle is prevented from completing the right turn by oncoming vehicles or other vehicles which are stationary whilst waiting to complete a right turn

In my formal appeal I have clearly stated grounds of 1) vague locus and 2) the box extending beyond the confines of the intersection of the two roads. These were the only grounds mentioned in the appeal.

In the Council’s subsequent Notice of Rejection, in spite of their ‘careful consideration’ neither of these significant grounds were either acknowledged or addressed. The Council believe the box is compliant with TSRGD 2016 because ‘the sides of the box are approximately at right angles to the flow of traffic’. This has no relevance to the definition of a junction and whether the box fits within the confines of the intersection of the two roads.

Only in the Summary of Council’s Representation is there reference to the vague location. The council admit it is not an exact location and have somehow satisfied themselves that the appellant knew the location referred to in the PCN.

The Council have included Secretary of State approval for a CCTV camera in a letter dated 15th May 2023 – presumably the camera at the junction of Cambridge Park and Blake Hall Road? The approved enforcement types in this letter clearly state Parking and Bus Lane only.

So when you write to the council that's a representation, not an appeal.

It's only an appeal when you get to the tribunal stage.

When's the hearing listed for?

I'm tidying up the draft so I'll make sure I use the right terminology.

It's listed for 19th September.

Make sure that the Tribunal has a copy of your submissions now so that the council is aware.  You need to upload the evidence on their website.  Otherwise, they may ask for an adjournment. At this stage in the game - 5 days before - I usually send the council a copy direct.

I'll get this done ASAP.

Initially ticking with vague location and box extends beyond junction, plus adding the challenge of negotiating the box from behind the wheel.

What legislation/regulations can I quote about the location stated on the PCN?  Is there any guidance on how accurate it needs to be?

Then onto the NoR and complete lack of consideration about vague location, irrelevant nonsense about the markings and failure to consider extending beyond junction.

I will cite the case CP mentioned above but will need some guidance on how to pitch it to the adjudicator.

Finally throw in the fact their Camera approval says parking and bus lanes only.


Is this the right approach, or need a different structure?