Free Traffic Legal Advice

wait for the video, but.. DONT MISS DEADLINES.

again, did you chase up TFL when you didn't get an acknowledgement?

Thanks - the clock was supposed to stop ticking when TfL receive the request; today is the deadline, hence the question before sending the appeal.

Ah - just checked and the TfL chase-up request for status on the video request was sent to the wrong address (the London Tribunals address).

Have sent a status request to the correct TfL one now.

Will be raising the appeal to London Tribunals today.

Will include your note about "see representations" - thanks!

So, today is day 28 from receiving the appeal rejection.


The requested video has not arrived and TfL didn't issue an acknowledgement of the request.


The status now shows "Charge Cerificate Batched".


[ Guests cannot view attachments ]


The right to appeal says "You have 28 days from receiving the Enforcement Agency's Notice of Rejection" and also "If you do not send within 28 days, you must explain why", so do we go ahead and file the appeal, or blindly wait to see if TfL do send the video?


[ Guests cannot view attachments ]


[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

The request for the video has gone in, but there's been no acknowledgement and no comment on the PCN status page.
Is it normal to hear nothing back?


[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

The TfL rejection is total tosh (as usual !!). The offence is entering the box then having to stop in the box due to the presence of stationary vehicles.

Only thing is, you would seem not to have asked for the video, so I suggest you do so now, because that is what the adjudicator will view at London Tribunals. If you want our advice on going to LT, it is essential we see the video. The photos show a vehicle in the entrance to the ambulance station. Could it be that you couldn't have driven in because this vehicle was preventing you doing so ? If so then the contravention is made out, but I have to say there does seem enough room to drive behind it and into the station.

So the bottom line is, are you willing to take them to London Tribunals ? They have re-offered the discount so you'd be risking an additional £80, hence our need to see the video to give best advice.

I hadn't asked for the video - how do I do that, please?
I think the photos show there's enough space to get in, but if the video helps then there's no harm in including it.

(Apologies for coming here part-way through the process - was recommended via another site.)


Status:

• PCN dated 15/8/24
• Appealed on the basis that the driver's destination was the ambulance station and they had to stop to give way to pedestrians crossing the entrance.
• Appeal rejection received 6/11/24, quoting TSRGD Paragraph 11: "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."
• Started formulating an appeal (draft below), but recommended to come here for help.
• Rejection received 6/11/24, so 28 days from that is 4/12/24.
• TfL do not participate in the Environment & Traffic Adjudicators online service, so the appeal has to be by post.

Draft of possible appeal against the rejection (not sent yet):

Overview:

1. Transport for London (TfL) issued a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) for allegedly "Entering and stopping in a box junction when prohibited".

2. An appeal was submitted stating that the destination was the Ambulance Station at the site and the vehicle was prevented from moving forwards to one of the vacant parking spaces in front to the building by pedestrians crossing in front of the vehicle.

3. An appeal rejection was received quoting the "Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 (TSRGD) Schedule 9, Part 2, Paragraph 11" as the contravention and stating "It is clear the PCN has been correctly issued".



Facts:

1. The quoted law, TSRGD Paragraph 11 states: "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. The rejection includes 3 photographs which each show people crossing in the vehicle's would-be path.

3. The rejection states that the vehicle was "stationary for a total of 8 seconds" for the duration of which there were always pedestrians blocking access.

4. The photographs show 2 empty parking spaces in front of the destination building.

5. The photographs show the exit of the box junction to be clear and a number of vehicles passing by and proceeding on through.

6. The TfL rejection states "It is clear the PCN has been correctly issued".

7. The rejection states that "we do not consider the mitigating factors present give reason to cancel".



Analysis:

1. The law states that a vehicle must not enter the box junction if its egress is prevented by stationary vehicles: this was simply not the case, with TfL's supplied photographs showing (a) that there were no stopped vehicles in-play and (b) other vehicles were freely proceeding on through the box junction.

2. The vehicle had to stop to give way to crossing pedestrians who are not criteria of the stated law because: (a) they were not stopped and (b) they are not vehicles.

3. The PCN stated "when prohibited", but the criteria for the alleged contravention were not met.

4. The rejection's statement that "It is clear the PCN has been correctly issued" is not borne out by the facts.

5. (Arguably the mitigating factors of the pedestrians preventing progress forwards into a vacant parking space at the destination should have been a reasonable basis for cancelling the notice, but the fact that no law was broken makes that point moot.)



Conclusion:

TfL have issued the PCN incorrectly and then rejected it by quoting a law which was not broken; thus there is no basis for the fine and the PCN mst be cancelled.

Original PCN pg.1




Notice of Rejection pg.1-7












Thanks very much for your time!