Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hi,

Recently received this PCN - not me driving though



I think (& driver thinks) there was room to clear the junction but they stopped to allow pedestrians to cross
Is this enough to appeal - there was space in front, in the case this might not have been sufficient space the driver could still have pulled to the right and cleared the junction that way?
In addition the paint of the box seems fairly worn, might this be helpful?

Thanks.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-i5PiVGSA50MQJPVyOLnf0NhhgkVN9nx/edit

Your case is similar to mine in that you stopped short and could have cleared the box but didn't.youll need to measure your car and the gap that was there (there is an app to do that).then informal reps which will be refused and then onto the tribunal where you risk the whole amount.

If you ask nicely ivan might pop along to give his view. If he says it's a runner, go with it

Waltham forest are sub human detritus however so you will have to risk paying the whole lot.

Thanks everyone.

It's annoying that because of the angle, fact that the camera moves and the low quality video it's hard to see the positions well. While I'm satisfied there's room there's always other peoples interpretations. I've uploaded a google maps view of the location.
I assume that the location to be concerned about is where exactly the car in front stops for the first time?
Is it worth mentioning the worn markings? I'll have to go down to see if they actually are worn or whether it's the camera quality.

Something like this: -

Dear Sirs

Ref: PCN: FR64089158

I make the following representations as to why the offence did not occur:

1. The hatched box markings are excessively worn, particularly on the exit.
2. The car did not stop in the box junction "due to the presence of stationary vehicles" as required for the offence, but to allow pedestrians to cross. Indeed, at the time that the car in front stops there is space for a car directly behind it and to the right (as occupied by the grey van at approximately the 24 second mark.)


Is there anything else worth mentioning or modifying?







[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

John your car is 4.6m long

https://www.automobiledimension.com/model/citroen/grand-c4-spacetourer

The gap immediately in front of your car was more than that. You should include this in your representations.

At anyone's best guess you had over double the length of your car if you measure to where the back of the nearest car was (roughly the  curb near the island on the right).


[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Just email your representations in a normal email to them

wfpcn@nsl.co.uk

As usual their reply is total tosh. Reference is only made to the Highway Code which is NOT law. The law is quite clear on YBJs; the offence is only made out if the car has to stop in the box due to the presence of stationary vehicles.

I am sure someone with more knowledge of this knows the answer but why don't representatives make a Costs application on each and every occasion the council come back with a load of garbage as they have here.

Clearly the PCN isn't valid. Clearly it should be cancelled. Yet they seem to be able to reply with gobbledegook with next to no risk of it coming back to bite them on the arse.

costs application?
vexatious?