Free Traffic Legal Advice

Normally the video has to show the precise moment of entry into the box junction as this is when the offence if committed. In your case your vehicle enters the box off screen, and we do not know at what moment that was or precise traffic conditions.

See what others think but you may be able to beat it on that basis.

Did you receive the Notice of Rejection of your representations in December?  If so, that ought to have included the code for appealing to London Tribunals plus details of the various deadlines you need to adhere to.

Just to build on Neil's response, the key part of the contravention wording is that you "had to" stop due to stationary vehicles.  We frequently win cases where the council sends a PCN but the video shows sufficient space for a car, which is stationary in the box junction, to be able move forward and exit the box.  I.e. it stopped in the box junction but it didn't have to.

In your case, the video is opaque as to how much space you left in front.  I estimate you were only in the box by around one wheel diameter (which for a Renault Clio I believe will be around 40 cm).  It's for the council to prove you committed a contravention so I'd like to think that a fair minded adjudicator would agree there is insufficient evidence you "had to" stop where you did.  The test is on the balance of probabilities so you would only need to create sufficient doubt as to this fact rather than prove your case.

40 cm is not very long, and I would suspect, unless you had deliberately got as close as possible to the vehicle in front as you knew you were likely to encroach into the box junction, that you would routinely leave at least 1 metre to the car in front.  Most cars these days have distance sensors which would enable you slowly to creep forward very closely to the car in front without fear of an actual collision meaning you could have fairly easily moved closer and out of the box if you had realised you had left your back wheel inside.

The council will never accept this argument, so your choices will be either to settle at £65 while the discount is still available, or take it to the tribunal where it's £0 if you win and £130 if you lose.

The car is only in the box junction by less than half a metre. How can we be sure from the camera angle the car couldn't have simply moved forward at least this much. If it could, then no contravention committed.

My latest autopay statement covers the period 6 March 2025 to 5 April 2025, but includes a charge for a journey on 5 March 2025.  I presume this is because it became chargeable four days later which took it into the window for the statement.

But I would therefore similarly expect the OPs original journey (16 March 2025) to fall into his first autopay statement if it commenced from 17 March 2025 when he set up autopay.

HCA, can you explain which bit of the T&Cs you quoted go against this interpretation as I'm not seeing it as clearly as you seem to be!

I take it your PS3 is the only item you own which plays CDs/DVDs?

Failing that, your options would seem to be to seek out a local friend who might have a DVD player, or a local library?  If you can find somewhere to play it, ideally we'd want you to download it and then upload a link where we can watch it, but failing that recording the screen with your phone while it plays is sufficient.

Your difficulty supports the tribunal decision referenced by Stamfordman!

Your own circumstances don't involve a CPZ. Fundamentally, were the double yellows sufficiently well marked that you can tell they are double yellows? The photos suggest to me the answer is yes, albeit photos sometimes come out stronger than the situation in real life.

If you have a Notice of Rejection I believe you can still take it to tribunal.  Please post it up.