3. Waltham Forest, 31 Box junction, Hall Lane / Sinclair Road
« previous next »
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: Waltham Forest, 31 Box junction, Hall Lane / Sinclair Road  (Read 800 times)

0 Members and 45 Guests are viewing this topic.

Waltham Forest, 31 Box junction, Hall Lane / Sinclair Road
« on: »
I came home yesterday to find a PCN for stopping with my motorbike front wheel over the edge of a box junction, which is a bit frustrating as I thought I'd stopped before it not on it and there was plenty of space for anyone to get by yadda yadda

Anyway, after close review of the video and of Google satellite images and of the relevant section of TSRGD 2016, I took the view that no offence had been committed because there was actually a space in my lane after the box that I could have moved forward into, but chose not to. So I crafted a challenge as follows, and sent it off using the council's online gateway

Quote
I wish to challenge this notice:

Per TSRGD 2016 paragraph 11  "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. "

As you can see from the photographs, there is space  beyond the junction, behind the stationary vehicle in my lane. I have measured this using google satellite view at 4.8 metres (the length of a lane marking).  My motorcycle is  only 2.1 metres long, so it did not have to stop due to the presence of the stationary vehicle beyond the box junction - there would have been space to clear the box.

(Please see also adjudicator case ref  2160252038)

I didn't know this forum existed until after I'd sent the response, so if I did that bit wrong it's too late now I guess. I suppose I could also have pointed out that I was barely even in the box and only there  for 8 seconds but I thought that would just over-complicate things.

* https://imgur.com/a/MI1sKSu PCN front page and video

*

* https://maps.app.goo.gl/qEfSBQ87ttH4Fi4C8 street view

Does anyone want to fill me in on what is likely to to happen next? If LBWF reject the challenge then the fine goes from £65 to £130 so I'm reluctant to take it to appeal unless there's 90% certainty the change will be cancelled.  What do you think?
« Last Edit: September 20, 2024, 11:29:11 am by coal-dentist-923 »
Logged

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook

Re: Waltham Forest, 31 Box junction, Hall Lane / Sinclair Road
« Reply #1 on: »
It barely looks like a contravention aside from the exit - there is a concept of de minimus (triviality) and the camera angle doesn't show your bike much in the box if at all. The exit space should be a winner alone as the contravention must be due to the presence of stationary vehicles.

Post the reply from WF when you get it but I'd say there's a good chance they won't even contest it at the tribunal should they reject at this stage.

Logged
Re: Waltham Forest, 31 Box junction, Hall Lane / Sinclair Road
« Reply #2 on: »
Definitely take this one all the way!
Logged
Re: Waltham Forest, 31 Box junction, Hall Lane / Sinclair Road
« Reply #3 on: »
Quote from: MrChips on September 20, 2024, 12:45:48 pm
Definitely take this one all the way!
+++++1
Do not be tempted to cough up; this is an absolutely outrageous money-rubbing PCN
Logged
Re: Waltham Forest, 31 Box junction, Hall Lane / Sinclair Road
« Reply #4 on: »
Well, I've had a "Notice of Rejection of Representation" from the council, and it seems to be mostly copy-paste generalisations that have no bearing on the specifics of the alleged contravention. First page:

https://imgur.com/a/NcNrI7Y

"... although you have stated there was sufficient space beyond the box junction for your vehicle, you were observed stationary in the box junction.". Er. So what?

I added some photos from the pavement showing how much space there is beyond the box (enough for a small van ...) and another showing that the box boundary extends well past the mouth of the side road, but I think that's more for entertainment than to be relied on.

What now? They sent the form to submit a formal appeal: there's a choice between written appeal or in-person hearing (no mention of an online hearing, it seems).  The fine goes from £65 to £130 which seems like quite a gamble if the adjudicator takes the council's view.  All advice is welcome.

Logged
Re: Waltham Forest, 31 Box junction, Hall Lane / Sinclair Road
« Reply #5 on: »
I think you should take this to the tribunal. They may not contest it.

But what were your reps? You didn't post them here first.Did you include that it hardly looks like you were in the box?

Mr Mustard (Derek) may represent you if you ask him - he just won this case:

2240396484

Mr Derek Dishman has attended the hearing today as the Company’s authorised representative.
This PCN was issued for the alleged contravention of entering and stopping in a box junction when prohibited.
Paragraph 11(1) of Part 7 of Schedule 9 to the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 states 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. It is a contravention to enter the box without a clear exit and to then stop in the box due to stationary vehicles in front.
I have reviewed the CCTV footage in this case. This shows that the Company’s car stopped at the entrance to the box and proceeded to cross the box when there was a clear space between the box exit line and the stationary car ahead. I am not satisfied from the evidence that this space did not provide a clear exit. The Company’s car stopped with just the rear wheels in the box and there remained a space between the front bumper and the car in front. If there was a clear exit, then there can have been no contravention even though the car was stopped in the box. I am not satisfied from the evidence that the alleged contravention occurred.


« Last Edit: October 12, 2024, 05:55:44 pm by stamfordman »
Logged
Re: Waltham Forest, 31 Box junction, Hall Lane / Sinclair Road
« Reply #6 on: »
Quote from: stamfordman on October 12, 2024, 05:52:38 pm

But what were your reps? You didn't post them here first

So I originally used their online portal to write what you see in the first post:
Quote
I wish to challenge this notice:

Per TSRGD 2016 paragraph 11  "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. "

As you can see from the photographs, there is space  beyond the junction, behind the stationary vehicle in my lane. I have measured this using google satellite view at 4.8 metres (the length of a lane marking).  My motorcycle is  only 2.1 metres long, so it did not have to stop due to the presence of the stationary vehicle beyond the box junction - there would have been space to clear the box.

(Please see also adjudicator case ref  2160252038)

but after about a few days with no response or any indication they'd received it, I sent a slightly longer version by email

Quote
Hi

I sent this through the online system last week but have not received a
response, so I am sending it again in case it got lost. Please
acknowledge receipt of one or the other, thanks.

PCN number FR63429636
VRM EX02ZDZ
Date of alleged contravention 07/09/2024 16:56

Location: Hall Lane E4 / Sinclair Road E4 (cctv)

I am challenging this PCN on the ground that there was no contravention.

Per TSRGD 2016 paragraph 11 "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. "

As you can see from the photographs, there is space beyond the junction,
behind the stationary vehicle in my lane. I have measured this using
Google Satellite view at 4.8 metres (the length of a lane marking).  My
motorcycle is only 2.1 metres long, so it follows that I did not have to
stop due to the presence of the stationary vehicle beyond the box
junction - there would have been space to clear the box.

I ask you therefore to cancel the PCN. I refer to your own "PCN
Cancellation Procedure & Guidelines" page 29, which states that "Camera
record shows that vehicle entered box when exit was not clear and
obstructed the vehicle path taken by other traffic movements." As is
evident in the video you have kindly provided, neither of these
conditions apply in this case.

So it probably depends on which version of the reps they're responding to (I did get an email acknowledgement of the second one)

I didn't mention in either version that I was barely in the box and only for a few seconds. Do you think it would have changed the outcome?
Logged
Re: Waltham Forest, 31 Box junction, Hall Lane / Sinclair Road
« Reply #7 on: »
That they rejected this at all is a disgrace - I think we can safely say it would make no difference which of your two representations were 'considered'.

I recall a case of a car driver who pulled up to stop at a box junction but marginally stopped inside (likely by a little more than you).  That went to adjudication and he won the appeal.  Alas I think it was long enough ago that it will have been on the old Pepipoo forum so I don't think I'll be able to dig it out to use to support your case (not that you really need it).

In this instance your case is even stronger as it's clear, even if you get a harsh adjudicator who won't allow on the de minimis nature of your incursion, that you didn't have to stop within the box as:

- you are driving a motorcycle which can filter into the gap between lanes
- even if you weren't inclined to filter, the car directly in front stopped far enough in front of the box to leave room for you.

Re the latter you refer to measuring distances.  I haven't done this but by looking at markings on the road it's fairly easy to identify from the end of the video by pausing it just as you leave, that the front of your motorcycle would have been behind where the rear of the car was while you were waiting.
Logged
Re: Waltham Forest, 31 Box junction, Hall Lane / Sinclair Road
« Reply #8 on: »
This is a ridiculous pcn. I am happy to be your representative at the tribunal if you get rejected, you acted within the spirit of the law. I would hope the adjudicator would agree it is too trivial to be concerned with ( legal doctrine of de minimis non curat lex ).
Logged
I help you pro bono (for free). I now ask that a £40 donation is made to the North London Hospice before I take over your case. I have an 85% success rate across 2,000 PCNs but some PCNs can't be beaten and I will tell you if your case looks hopeless before asking you to donate.
Re: Waltham Forest, 31 Box junction, Hall Lane / Sinclair Road
« Reply #9 on: »
This is a ridiculous pcn. I am happy to be your representative at the tribunal if you get rejected, you acted within the spirit of the law. I would hope the adjudicator would agree it is too trivial to be concerned with ( legal doctrine of de minimis non curat lex ).
Logged
I help you pro bono (for free). I now ask that a £40 donation is made to the North London Hospice before I take over your case. I have an 85% success rate across 2,000 PCNs but some PCNs can't be beaten and I will tell you if your case looks hopeless before asking you to donate.
Re: Waltham Forest, 31 Box junction, Hall Lane / Sinclair Road
« Reply #10 on: »
Register the appeal and ask for a personal/telephone hearing.

Just say the contravention did not occur as you stopped diligently at the start of the box and in any case you had ample room to clear the box had you wanted to.
Logged
Re: Waltham Forest, 31 Box junction, Hall Lane / Sinclair Road
« Reply #11 on: »
DENIED MY DAY IN COURT  :)




That's a weight off my mind. Thanks everyone who offered advice and said I should appeal it
Logged
Re: Waltham Forest, 31 Box junction, Hall Lane / Sinclair Road
« Reply #12 on: »
There was no chance of losing this - just a shame they are so incompetent.
Logged
Pages: [1]
« previous next »
  3. Waltham Forest, 31 Box junction, Hall Lane / Sinclair Road