Show Posts
1
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: C31 J Yellow Box Jct. LB Lewisham. Turning from side road onto main route which had yellow box.
« on: March 20, 2025, 06:24:15 pm »
I sent my representation on 17 March and it was accepted and PCN cancelled 20 March.
I went for a three pronged attack. The response from NSL/Lewisham gave no information on what specific point the PCN was cancelled it simply said: "I have noted your comments. I am pleased to inform you that after careful consideration your representations have been accepted and the Penalty Charge Notice has been cancelled. You need take no further action".
1) The contravention did not occur
The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016, UK Statutory Instruments, 2016 No. 362, Schedule 9, PART 7, Paragraph 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.
(2) Subject to sub-paragraph (4) the marking when placed as a box junction within sub-paragraph (6)(c) of the definition of that expression 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 oncoming vehicles or other stationary vehicles beyond the box junction.
It is important to remember that this specific contravention (C31 J) is not that of causing an obstruction or blocking the yellow box, it is quite simply “entering a box junction when your exit is not clear”. It is possible to stop within a yellow box without committing an offence. For example if at the time you entered the box the exit was clear but then a driver cut in front of you and stopped, forcing you to stop in the yellow box.
The video evidence shows that the driver begun their right turn out from the junction of the minor road Lewisham High Street onto the major road Lewisham Road when the exit was clear and had sufficient exit space for the vehicle (evidence ‘1 CCTV Still 17.01.54.480’). Another vehicle (white/red vehicle) then cuts in front of the turning driver (evidence ‘2 CCTV Still 17.01.55.280’), stops in the available space and forces the driver to stop on the yellow box; if the driver had moved forward at this point then they would have caused a collision with the side of the white/red vehicle (evidence ‘3 CCTV Still 17.02.03.250); alternatively had the driver moved across the lane dividing lines they would have caused a collision with oncoming traffic that had been funnelled into a single lane because of the presence of roadworks, evidence ‘4 CCTV Still 17.02.21.685’ shows how close passing traffic came as they are forced into the right hand turning lane despite the fact that they are actually turning left or continuing straight on. The driver acted within the legislation as quoted above when entering the yellow box junction and acted calmly and responsibly to avoid a collision when another driver cuts in front.
The evidence shows that the exit was clear with sufficient space when the driver entered the yellow box junction therefore the contravention did not occur.
In light of the above, I ask that the PCN be cancelled.
2) Irregularites in the issuing of the PCN
A PCN issued under the 2003 act cannot possibly act as Notice to Owner. Furthermore, there is a whole passage on the PCN/Notice to Owner (sic) which contains information concerning the 56 days period in which to respond which clearly is taken from parking law. So it follows that this hybrid document should also contain grounds which belong to parking legislation.
3) Roadworks at this location increased complexity and risk for the driver
The 2 sets of roadworks at the junction of Lewisham High Street and Lewisham Road limited the view and increased the complexity and risk level for motorists trying to manoeuvre their vehicle from the junction of Lewisham High Street out onto the Lewisham Road. The yellow box junction is located at this exact intersection. These roadworks form part of Lewisham’s Town Centre Improvement Programme:
See Lewisham website:
(https://lewisham.gov.uk/inmyarea/regeneration/lewishamtowncentre/lewisham-town-centre-improvement-programme )
Quote: “Installing a new green space with planting and seating, at the north end of the high street (near the Premier Inn) by the River Quaggy.”
If Lewisham Council are to pursue this alleged contravention then they will need to provide evidence that a full Construction Management Plan (CMP) was undertaken to assess and show the change in risk levels to motorists that resulted in the temporary road layout changes and specifically that these changes did not increase the complexity and risk for motorists turning out from Lewisham High Street and therefore led to an increase in alleged contraventions. These roadworks involved shutting lanes, narrowing lanes, storing materials and plant/machinery on the intersections; all these will need to be shown as abiding by the CMP. Photographic evidence of the roadworks as of the date the driver received the PCN (14/03/2025) has been included; the roadworks however were more substantial on the date of the alleged contravention and therefore if Lewisham Council are to pursue this alleged contravention then the driver requests wider angled CCTV footage to show the extent of these roadworks at the exact time of the alleged contravention.
If Lewisham Council are to pursue this alleged contravention then the driver requests under their Freedom Of Information legislation, the right to request that Lewisham Council provide evidence of the number of issued PCNs for this location before roadworks beginning and the number of issued PCNs for this location after roadworks beginning.
In light of the above, I ask that the PCN be cancelled.
I went for a three pronged attack. The response from NSL/Lewisham gave no information on what specific point the PCN was cancelled it simply said: "I have noted your comments. I am pleased to inform you that after careful consideration your representations have been accepted and the Penalty Charge Notice has been cancelled. You need take no further action".
1) The contravention did not occur
The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016, UK Statutory Instruments, 2016 No. 362, Schedule 9, PART 7, Paragraph 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.
(2) Subject to sub-paragraph (4) the marking when placed as a box junction within sub-paragraph (6)(c) of the definition of that expression 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 oncoming vehicles or other stationary vehicles beyond the box junction.
It is important to remember that this specific contravention (C31 J) is not that of causing an obstruction or blocking the yellow box, it is quite simply “entering a box junction when your exit is not clear”. It is possible to stop within a yellow box without committing an offence. For example if at the time you entered the box the exit was clear but then a driver cut in front of you and stopped, forcing you to stop in the yellow box.
The video evidence shows that the driver begun their right turn out from the junction of the minor road Lewisham High Street onto the major road Lewisham Road when the exit was clear and had sufficient exit space for the vehicle (evidence ‘1 CCTV Still 17.01.54.480’). Another vehicle (white/red vehicle) then cuts in front of the turning driver (evidence ‘2 CCTV Still 17.01.55.280’), stops in the available space and forces the driver to stop on the yellow box; if the driver had moved forward at this point then they would have caused a collision with the side of the white/red vehicle (evidence ‘3 CCTV Still 17.02.03.250); alternatively had the driver moved across the lane dividing lines they would have caused a collision with oncoming traffic that had been funnelled into a single lane because of the presence of roadworks, evidence ‘4 CCTV Still 17.02.21.685’ shows how close passing traffic came as they are forced into the right hand turning lane despite the fact that they are actually turning left or continuing straight on. The driver acted within the legislation as quoted above when entering the yellow box junction and acted calmly and responsibly to avoid a collision when another driver cuts in front.
The evidence shows that the exit was clear with sufficient space when the driver entered the yellow box junction therefore the contravention did not occur.
In light of the above, I ask that the PCN be cancelled.
2) Irregularites in the issuing of the PCN
A PCN issued under the 2003 act cannot possibly act as Notice to Owner. Furthermore, there is a whole passage on the PCN/Notice to Owner (sic) which contains information concerning the 56 days period in which to respond which clearly is taken from parking law. So it follows that this hybrid document should also contain grounds which belong to parking legislation.
3) Roadworks at this location increased complexity and risk for the driver
The 2 sets of roadworks at the junction of Lewisham High Street and Lewisham Road limited the view and increased the complexity and risk level for motorists trying to manoeuvre their vehicle from the junction of Lewisham High Street out onto the Lewisham Road. The yellow box junction is located at this exact intersection. These roadworks form part of Lewisham’s Town Centre Improvement Programme:
See Lewisham website:
(https://lewisham.gov.uk/inmyarea/regeneration/lewishamtowncentre/lewisham-town-centre-improvement-programme )
Quote: “Installing a new green space with planting and seating, at the north end of the high street (near the Premier Inn) by the River Quaggy.”
If Lewisham Council are to pursue this alleged contravention then they will need to provide evidence that a full Construction Management Plan (CMP) was undertaken to assess and show the change in risk levels to motorists that resulted in the temporary road layout changes and specifically that these changes did not increase the complexity and risk for motorists turning out from Lewisham High Street and therefore led to an increase in alleged contraventions. These roadworks involved shutting lanes, narrowing lanes, storing materials and plant/machinery on the intersections; all these will need to be shown as abiding by the CMP. Photographic evidence of the roadworks as of the date the driver received the PCN (14/03/2025) has been included; the roadworks however were more substantial on the date of the alleged contravention and therefore if Lewisham Council are to pursue this alleged contravention then the driver requests wider angled CCTV footage to show the extent of these roadworks at the exact time of the alleged contravention.
If Lewisham Council are to pursue this alleged contravention then the driver requests under their Freedom Of Information legislation, the right to request that Lewisham Council provide evidence of the number of issued PCNs for this location before roadworks beginning and the number of issued PCNs for this location after roadworks beginning.
In light of the above, I ask that the PCN be cancelled.