Free Traffic Legal Advice

The video has to show the moment you enter they box. If they've edited it such that it starts after another vehicle manoeuvre which happened after you entered, that should strengthen your hand.

Hard to comment in detail though as we haven't had sight of the documents or video yet.

Also, 103 days is likely to be considered unfair. If you help us to help you by providing the detail we need we can probably find other things you can win on over and above an argument about video editing.

Did they address the grave period issue?

Which is your vehicle? There's a few which get stuck on the box.

It's 'righter' 

I think the references to Schedule 1 aren't right (from memory that bit relates to making representations). References to 28 days in the legislation also need to be carefully constructed because the LLA 2003 doesn't explicitly state the charge may be increased after 28 days beginning with date of notice (as opposed to date of service) but it can be inferred from the context it falls within.

Given Hippocrates has offered to draft something, and this is something he's infinitely more qualified than me to talk about, I'll hold off trying to fix it myself just now.

Give it a few more days, you are only on day 6 starting with the date of notice.

If no traction by middle of the week come back and I'll help draft something.

Here you go - also heed Hippocrates's comment.  i've slimmed it down a bit by removing stuff that's largely irrelevant and focussing on the two bits which I think are your strongest arguments.



I am writing to make formal representations against the above Penalty Charge Notice. I deny that a contravention occurred and request that the Penalty Charge Notice be cancelled, for the following reasons.
 
1. The contravention did not occur — any incursion into the box junction markings was of a de minimis nature and, on balance of probabilities, there was sufficient space to receive my vehicle.

A box junction contravention only arises where a vehicle enters and has to stop within the box junction because there is insufficient space beyond it to receive the vehicle, due to the presence of stationary traffic. It is not in itself a contravention simply to be stationary within the box markings if the vehicle could otherwise have moved forward and exited the box.

From the council's evidence, my vehicle stopped with only the rear wheels resting on the extremities of the box junction markings. I believe this is of a clearly de minimis nature. Notwithstanding the trivial nature of the incursion, I believe in these circumstances my vehicle could have cleared the box junction by moving forward a foot or so into the gap to the car directly in front. If the vehicle could exit but the driver chose not to for whatever reason, then no contravention has occurred.

2. The contravention did not occur - the installation of roadworks have reduced the width of the junction with Kingsley Road

From the council evidence, there are roadworks in the left hand lane of Forest Road. These encroach into the junction with Kingsley Road including into the box junction markings. I have taken my own photograph (attached) which more clearly shows the level of incursion is not insignificant.

These roadworks themselves block the junction to a far greater extent than my own vehicle did.  Due to the relative position of the roadworks and the rear of my vehicle, there is no way my vehicle could have caused any obstruction as a vehicle would have had to drive through the roadworks first. There would seem to be no logic or justice in enforcing a stop on the far extremities of a box junction which itself is no longer part of the usable junction between two roads.

The box junction regulations themselves require that box junction markings must be installed at a junction or two (or more) roads and as such any markings situated at a point which is not at such a junction is not legally a box junction and so cannot be enforced.

For these reasons, I request that the Penalty Charge Notice be cancelled. I look forward to your response.

That's a really pedantic PCN I must say!

To me it's a de minimis contravention, but the trouble with de minimis is it's subjective so very hard to give you any guarantees on how this one might play out.  Personally, out of principle I'd fight it but if you take it all the way and lose you will be £160 down rather than £80.

I'd draft representations to the council along the following lines:

- video shows I clearly intended to stop at the box junction to leave access to the side road clear.
- any incursion was just a slight misjudgement of the length of the car rather than poor decision making or flouting the box junction rules
- in any case, the amount of the vehicle inside the box junction was trivial, had no impact on traffic or blocking access to/from Pretoria Road and is clearly of a de minimis nature such that the law would consider it a trifling irrelevance.
- if the council does not agree, I put it on record that the council's video shows I clearly had room to reverse the small distance necessary back out of the box and as such I did not have to stop in the box due to stationary vehicles and so no offence occurred under the specific box junction rules in any case.

The box junction rules state an offence only occurs if you entered the box and then were forced to stop inside the box due to stationary vehicles.  I don't think I've seen it argued that this means blocked from reversing out of the box, but there's nothing in the legislation wording against this, and in your circumstances I think an adjudicator might be sympathetic to such an argument.

It would definitely be worth challenging - unless you'd rather just pay up and get it over with.

Your PCN includes details about how to submit representations (there is a section titled "How to make representations") - these are best done online as you can then be confident they have been successfully received by the council and you should get a confirmation email to confirm you've submitted something.

However, agree a draft with us first to maximise the chances of submitting something relevant that will help you further on should this go to adjudication.

Unlike many councils, Bexley have also guaranteed in their PCN that they will reoffer you the discounted PCN payment amount if they reject your representations so long as you submit them during the 14 day discount period.  So, as long as you submit something no later than 5 July, you have nothing to lose.

Any representations should likely focus on the lack of compliance of the PCN wording with the requirements of the LLA 2003.  As mentioned, Hippocrates is an expert on this so if he spots this thread he may offer to help.  Failing that I can have a go.