Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: Princeperch on November 05, 2023, 09:12:23 pm
-
Sincere thanks once again Ivan.
-
Outcome (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-i5PiVGSA50MQJPVyOLnf0NhhgkVN9nx).
-
https://ibb.co/T8z54cT
https://ibb.co/Hrn4wrr
https://ibb.co/xsGsjF4
https://ibb.co/tCGcrJY
-
Well somewhat inevitably I have had the notice of rejection today.
What I find utterly perplexing is that they wilfully fail to engage with everything that was said in my representation. It's not even as if they have a half arsed attempt at cobbling an argument together they have just ignored everything I've said.
What they have said is the exit was not clear when I entered the box and whatever way you look at it that cannot be right as there is a large gap available when I am past the point of no return.
Ivan are you still happy to represent me at a hearing over this? Do you have any pointers for me in filling out the form to go to a tribunal over this? Can we apply for costs against Waltham forest for this do you think if you and me have a signed agreement I will pay you if you win? I absolutely hate this type of grubby mercenary behaviour from local authorities. I am not on the breadline and if I end up having to pay the full whack here Christmas won't be cancelled, however it might be a different story for someone else.
Anyway, I'll post some links to the rejection notice but I'm sure none of the whitewash that follows will come as a surprise.
-
Thanks Ivan. I'll be in touch when I hear back from them with their boiler plate rejection.
Keep up the good work.
-
Thank you. Do you think I've got reasonable prospects of success at tribunal? If so I'll happily take the risk.
Yes I do, I won the other case that was basically the same as this.
-
Thank you. Do you think I've got reasonable prospects of success at tribunal? If so I'll happily take the risk.
-
Just catching up on things now, if the council rejects I'll be happy to represent you at the tribunal.
-
OK I've whacked this in tonight. Will keep this thread updated. Fully expect to have to take it to a hearing!
Dear London Borough of Waltham Forest
I challenge liability for PCN FR60841371 on the grounds that the alleged contravention did not occur as alleged or at all. I make the following points and would ask you properly consider and address each submission that I make:
1) In respect of box junctions, it is trite law that a contravention is only committed if a person causes 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. There is an exemption for vehicles which enter the box junction for the purpose of turning right and wait in the box junction to complete the turn due to oncoming traffic or another stationary vehicle waiting to turn right.
2) As I approached the box junction, there was ample space to accommodate my vehicle at my chosen exit as is clearly evidenced by the footage from the enforcement camera. However just at the point I was committed to entering the box and did so, the oncoming vehicle (which was not indicating left) suddenly chose to turn left rather than go straight on and took the space on the road I had assessed was available when I entered the box and had intended to use as my exit. Notwithstanding this issue, from viewing the video footage, I can see my vehicle was inside the box only to a very limited extent (broadly by just over one wheel diameter). I contend that it is clear from the footage that there was enough space in front of my vehicle for me to move forward by at least this amount, if not significantly more, and as such I did not have to stop within the box due to a stationary vehicle (a necessary requirement for the contravention to be made out). I refer to tribunal decision 2230392476 (also from this location) which sets out almost identical circumstances in which the PCN was quashed on appeal. I stopped just short of the crossing directly in front of my car which in all the circumstances was a reasonable course of action. It is clear from the cctv that there was more than ample space in front of my vehicle for me to have cleared the box by some considerable margin, and thus the contravention did not occur as alleged, or at all.
3) As per the contravention definition (taken from the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016), where a contravention occurs, it occurs at the point the driver causes the vehicle to enter the box junction (my emphasis added). To paraphrase, the offence is one of showing poor judgement to enter the box junction in circumstances which ultimately result in the vehicle being blocked in the box junction due to stationary vehicles directly in front impeding its exit from the box junction. None of these factors are at play here. When I took the decision to enter the box junction to turn right it is clear there was ample space to accommodate my vehicle - my judgment in this respect cannot be criticised, because my exit was clear and I therefore proceeded to enter the box. It remains the case that whilst the vehicle that turned left (without indicating) took up some of the space I had assessed as being available to me at the point I entered the box junction - there was still more than enough space directly in front of my car for me to move forward without colliding with the vehicle in front. It stands to reason, and is as plain as a pikestaff from the footage, that my car did not stop In the box junction because of a stationary vehicle in front of mine, which is what the council is required to prove in order for this to be a properly issued PCN.
4) The PCN I received alleges a contravention taking place at 1538. However the video evidence supplied by the Authority shows my vehicle entering the box junction, which is the alleged contravention, at 1537. While the time difference is only of one minute, the PCN is required, by law, to set out full and accurate grounds on which the council believes that the penalty charge is payable with respect to the vehicle. As such the contravention alleged in the PCN at the time pleaded by the council, manifestly did not occur and the PCN is thus defective.
5) I also point out that I entered the box junction for the purpose of turning right. While I note that ultimately my vehicle stopped behind another vehicle which was not waiting to turn right, it is the case that had my vehicle waited in the centre of the box junction and taken longer over the right turn, then the right turn exemption would have remained in play. Consequently it would seem that the council wishes to attempt to punish me in this case for seeking to cease causing an obstruction in the centre of the box and move to the extremities (which from the footage seem to be marked a outside a strict interpretation of the boundaries of the junction between the two roads).
In summary, my car did not commit the contravention as alleged at the time as alleged.
In light of these representations, in respect of which I ask for a response by post, I look forward to confirmation the PCN has been cancelled.
Yours sincerely
-
If it would be clear to a blind man on a flying horse that there is room in front to clear the box don't add a measurement if it is a close thing do so
:D
I'll await the inevitable rejection of my representation from Waltham forest in that case.
-
If it would be clear to a blind man on a flying horse that there is room in front to clear the box don't add a measurement if it is a close thing do so
-
Just bringing this back to the top of the list for any last minute comments or observations before I finalise the grounds and pop them in before the deadline.
If anyone with the relevant skills can measure what distance there was in front of my car I would be eternally grateful but if the consensus is that it's not worth worrying about all that much then I'll happily take the advice.
Cheers
Jack
-
Thank you very much Mr chips for this, very much appreciated.
Re the space in front I would hope that whoevet ultimately looks at this will see there is a wedge of space in the front of my car even when the car from the left turns in.
I was hoping to measure the distance from the edge of the box to say the furthest dashed line of the crossing in front of me to say "from Google earth it is clear there is a gap in the front of my car of x metres". I spose I don't want to be in a position whereby the adjudicator says how do you expect me to know from the evidence I have how big the gap was in front of you with out any form of specific measurements to go on.
If you guys think that's overkill and I am over thinking things then I am happy to be guided by you.
I also will take a steer on whether it is worth making a representation as to why I stopped where I did, I. E to not foul the crossing directly in front of me?
Also, final thought from me for today - if anyone here thinks I am onto a loser with this and I should just chalk it up and pay it please do say. I'm inclined to contest it but then I am a bit of an awkward git. But if anyone thinks I'm more likely to end up losing this than getting a more positive result please also let me know.
-
OK fair enough best include it then.
I've spent about an hour today trying to find how to measure distances using Google maps on my work lap top and phone and still dont seem to be able to do it unfortunately. Quite frustrating!
Looking on Google maps at the box and the marked area directly in front, I've got at a guess probably 6 feet in front of the car and I'm in the box only by a few inches at the back.
You can measure distance by right clicking in googlemaps on the point you want to measure from, selecting "Measure distance" and then left-clicking where you want the second measurement point to be. I've tried doing this in your case but due to the camera angle and the position of the other cars, it's quite difficult to ascertain exactly how much space you might have had. Others are welcome to try and see if they can do it. As such, in the draft reps, I've focussed more on the fact you can objectively see only your rear wheel is just inside the box and hopefully the adjudicator can judge there was at least this much space ahead of you.
-
Here's a draft representation to kick things off. Suggest waiting to see if cp8759 or others want to refine it.
Dear London Borough of Waltham Forest
I challenge liability for PCN FR60841371 on the grounds that the alleged contravention did not occur.
In respect of box junctions, a contravention is only committed if a person causes 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. There is an exemption for vehicles which enter the box junction for the purpose of turning right and wait in the box junction to complete the turn due to oncoming traffic or another stationary vehicle waiting to turn right.
1) As I approached the box junction, there was ample space to accommodate my vehicle at my chosen exit. However just at the point I was committed to entering the box, the oncoming vehicle (which was not indicating left) suddenly chose to turn left rather than go straight on and took the space on the road I had intended to use as my exit. Notwithstanding this issue, from viewing the video footage, I can see my vehicle was inside the box only to a limited extent (broadly by just over one wheel diameter). I contend that there was enough space in front of my vehicle for me to move forward by at least this amount, and as such I did not have to stop within the box (a necessary requirement for the contravention to be made out). I refer to tribunal decision 2230392476 (also from this location) which sets out very similar circumstances.
2) As per the contravention definition (taken from the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016), where a contravention occurs, it occurs at the point the driver causes the vehicle to enter the box junction. To paraphrase, the offence is one of showing poor judgement to enter the box junction in circumstances which ultimately result in the vehicle being blocked in the box junction due to stationary vehicles impeding its exit from the box junction.
The PCN I received alleges a contravention taking place at 1538. However the video evidence supplied by the Authority shows my vehicle entering the box junction at 1537. While the time difference is only of one minute, the PCN is required by law to set out the grounds on which the council believes that the penalty charge is payable with respect to the vehicle and as such the contravention alleged in the PCN manifestly did not occur.
3) I also point out that I entered the box junction for the purpose of turning right. While I note that ultimately my vehicle stopped behind another vehicle which was not waiting to turn right, it is the case that had my vehicle waited in the centre of the box junction and taken longer over the right turn, then the right turn exemption would have remained in play and a contravention would not have been committed. Consequently it would seem I am being punished in this case for seeking to cease causing an obstruction in the centre of the box and move to the extremities (which from the footage seem to be marked a little outside a strict interpretation of the boundaries of the junction between the two roads).
In light of these representations, I look forward to confirmation the PCN has been cancelled.
Kind regards,
-
OK fair enough best include it then.
I've spent about an hour today trying to find how to measure distances using Google maps on my work lap top and phone and still dont seem to be able to do it unfortunately. Quite frustrating!
Looking on Google maps at the box and the marked area directly in front, I've got at a guess probably 6 feet in front of the car and I'm in the box only by a few inches at the back.
-
I don't know how an adjudicator would view it but I'd definitely include it in representations/appeal. The contravention as stated on your PCN manifestly did not occur.
-
Does that matter though? I would have thought that a time difference of 30-60 seconds would be given short shrift at a hearing?
-
Or to put it another way, what time did the driver cause the vehicle to enter the box junction so that the vehicle had to stop within the box junction due to the presence of stationary vehicles.
The PCN says 1538, the evidence shows 1537.
-
I'll be guided by the experts but I would have thought if the previous poster at the same location in Leyton had the same issue as me and the gap in front argument was a success then hopefully I have a good chance here.
It's a bloody stupid junction layout really given it has a pedestrian crossing that close to the edges of the box. They must catch loads of people like this and it's only by luck I haven't been done here before as I used to drive through here weekly to get to aldi. Which I'll no longer be doing!
-
I disagree. What is the offence? Causing the vehicle to enter the box such that...
The test is a test of the drivers judgement in choosing to enter the box. That judgement is exercised at the point of entry. By the time they've stopped it's already too late.
That's also the reason that videos which don't show point of entry mean there's no evidence of the offence and generally win by default.
-
IMO when read the regs say that it is the stopping which is the contravention not entering the box
11.—(1) Subject to sub-paragraphs (2), (3) and (4), the yellow criss-cross marking provided for at item 25 of the sign table in Part 6 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.
-
You've got until 15 November before the discount expires, so be a little more patient please. We'll help you draft something.
-
Any further thoughts before I try and cobble something together for this appeal?? I'd really like to add the measurements in for the gap in front of the car but I've got no bloody idea how to do it! Really grateful for a steer.
-
The time point is something I had not noticed so thank you. Would that really find traction at a hearing though and make the Pcn invalid in some way?
I have no idea how I can take measurements from the information and data I have to prove beyond doubt there was enough space for me to be clear of the box, even thought it is pretty clear that there is a decent wedge of space directly in front of my car. Looking at the back wheels in the box I would only need a few inches in front of me to prove it.
If anyone can help with that when they have a mo over the next few days I would be very grateful.
-
According to their video you enter the box at 1537, but the PCN quotes the offence time as 1538 (offence is causing vehicle to enter the box in such a way it subsequently stops due to stationary vehicles). Contravention as stated therefore did not occur.
Regarding the video itself, it's one of those daft cases where a literal reading of the regulation suggests it's a contravention, but had the vehicle waited slap bang in the middle of the box it wouldn't be which seems perverse. Hopefully CP's input will be helpful (in addition to my opening comment)
-
Seems I mistakenly locked this thread earlier, apologies, - I think I have now unlocked it!
-
Thank you so very much for your reply and offer of help. I am very grateful.
The total length of the car from front bumper to back bumper is 4492mm
The car is unusual however because it has an enormous overhang over the rear wheels - the overhang past the back wheels is 1045mm.
So from front bumper to back wheels it's 3447mm which is the length to presumably see me clear of the box. Although you may feel we have to use the total length of the car of 4492mm.
The width of the car is required is 1493mm.
Thank you for any help you can provide.
-
Video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RETD5KVKaew
This is basically the same as https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/yellow-box-junction-pcn/ and there's a draft here (https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/yellow-box-junction-pcn/msg2183/#msg2183) we can mostly recycle.
If you can you confirm the length of your car, for instance from the owner's handbook, I'll type something up for you.
-
OK, so here is GSV for the location: -
https://maps.app.goo.gl/efueXdrEDViZwnfJ7
Normally there is an exemption for turning right at a yellow box junction (YBJ), that allows you to wait in the box until you can make the turn when traffic in the opposite direction allows it. Here you were able to make the turn with no traffic in the opposite direction preventing you, (at least that's what your video shows), but couldn't exit the box due to stationary vehicles preventing you. It would have actually been better if you had waited in the box with your indicators flashing, until you could make the turn.
Whether an adjudicator would allow your case using the right turn exemption is not certain, in my opinion, but see what the others say.
-
https://ibb.co/VmsZW4x
https://ibb.co/S6ZZM7W
https://ibb.co/bN9VmFF
Understood and thanks the other pages are above. Sorry if this isn't the best way but I am not good with computers?
I am wondering if it's worth mounting a defence to the alleged offence with the following
1) there was a gap when I went past the point of no return on entering the box
2) that gap became smaller when the car turned left instead of going straight on
3) notwithstanding that the cctv shows that I could have been clear of the box with the gap in front of me, however I stopped where i did to leave the crossing clear in front of me, there was a sufficient gap directly in front I could have gone into but thought I was clear of the box
Any good?
-
(https://i.ibb.co/tzRxbqf/16992158443905399281111568891590.jpg) (https://ibb.co/gdYPDS1)
The other 3 pages are just about how to appeal etc
Please post the rest - there are often mistakes, sometimes fatal to the PCN, in the 'small print'.
-
Hi there
The Pcn is in the link in the post. The other 3 pages are just about how to appeal etc
-
Post all of the PCN please
-
Hi folks
I've turned right here countless times this is the first ticket.
https://ibb.co/gdYPDS1
I'll link to a YouTube video from the Pcn here
https://youtube.com/shorts/FAjiTw7ZvIM?si=ntU3dNrv09x4X_Wc
You'll see that when I went into the box to turn right the traffic was moving albeit slowly. When I was at the point of no return I could see there was a space for me to go into so went in to wait for the car coming towards me to go past. He then turns left (without indicating). We both go into the box at pretty much the same time.
I also see from the video there was probably enough space for me to be clear of the box anyway which is annoying.
I don't think I've done anything wrong here - it's a large junction and I cannot possibly be expected to guess whether the car coming towards me is going straight on or left!
Any thoughts gratefully received.