Show Posts
1
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Waltham Forest - 31 entering and stopping in box junction - Kings Road E4
« on: Yesterday at 12:38:09 am »
Thank you both for your helpful replies! I’ve drafted (with the help of AI) the below representations based on MrChips’ suggestions - would appreciate your thoughts before I submit the appeal to the council?
Penalty Charge Notice: FR69077699
Vehicle Registration: RV64 XTA
Dear Sir or Madam,
I wish to make representations against the above Penalty Charge Notice.
The CCTV clearly shows that I approached the junction intending to stop before the yellow box in order to keep the side road clear. The vehicle ahead hesitated before proceeding across the junction, and I stopped while it was still moving. In doing so, I made a slight misjudgement of the position of the front of my vehicle, resulting in only the bonnet and front wheels marginally overhanging the edge of the box.
I submit that this amounts to a de minimis encroachment. The overwhelming majority of my vehicle remained outside the box, there was no obstruction to vehicles entering or leaving Pretoria Road, and the purpose of the box junction was not frustrated. This was a minor error in judging the length of a car with a particularly short bonnet, not an attempt to enter a blocked junction or disregard the restriction.
Further, the prohibition applies where a vehicle enters the box so that it has to stop due to the presence of stationary vehicles. The footage shows that the vehicle ahead was still moving when I stopped. Any slight encroachment resulted from that vehicle’s hesitation and my attempt to comply with the restriction by stopping before the box, rather than from knowingly entering a junction with insufficient space beyond it due to stationary vehicles.
In the alternative, the CCTV also demonstrates that there was sufficient space behind my vehicle for me to reverse the small distance necessary to remove the slight overhang. While I did not consider reversing in live traffic to be the safest course of action, this further illustrates that my vehicle was not truly trapped within the box by stationary vehicles.
Given the trivial nature of the encroachment, the absence of any obstruction, and my clear intention to comply with the restriction, I respectfully request that the Council cancel this PCN. If the Council is not minded to do so, I ask that the Notice of Rejection addresses each of the points raised above.
Yours faithfully,
Alex—
Penalty Charge Notice: FR69077699
Vehicle Registration: RV64 XTA
Dear Sir or Madam,
I wish to make representations against the above Penalty Charge Notice.
The CCTV clearly shows that I approached the junction intending to stop before the yellow box in order to keep the side road clear. The vehicle ahead hesitated before proceeding across the junction, and I stopped while it was still moving. In doing so, I made a slight misjudgement of the position of the front of my vehicle, resulting in only the bonnet and front wheels marginally overhanging the edge of the box.
I submit that this amounts to a de minimis encroachment. The overwhelming majority of my vehicle remained outside the box, there was no obstruction to vehicles entering or leaving Pretoria Road, and the purpose of the box junction was not frustrated. This was a minor error in judging the length of a car with a particularly short bonnet, not an attempt to enter a blocked junction or disregard the restriction.
Further, the prohibition applies where a vehicle enters the box so that it has to stop due to the presence of stationary vehicles. The footage shows that the vehicle ahead was still moving when I stopped. Any slight encroachment resulted from that vehicle’s hesitation and my attempt to comply with the restriction by stopping before the box, rather than from knowingly entering a junction with insufficient space beyond it due to stationary vehicles.
In the alternative, the CCTV also demonstrates that there was sufficient space behind my vehicle for me to reverse the small distance necessary to remove the slight overhang. While I did not consider reversing in live traffic to be the safest course of action, this further illustrates that my vehicle was not truly trapped within the box by stationary vehicles.
Given the trivial nature of the encroachment, the absence of any obstruction, and my clear intention to comply with the restriction, I respectfully request that the Council cancel this PCN. If the Council is not minded to do so, I ask that the Notice of Rejection addresses each of the points raised above.
Yours faithfully,
Alex—