Daft adjudication decision

Spotted this London Tribunals decision while looking at cases at a specific location to assist a live case on the Council PCN forum.  Managed to source the video too.

How can the adjudicator get it so wrong? I don't know if the appellant has requested a review - is there anything I can do to highlight this clear error to the Tribunal if they haven't as it's less than a week old?

Case Details
Case reference 2260033530
Appellant Siteglass Southern Ltd
Authority Royal Borough of Greenwich
VRM LX22ZXS
PCN Details
PCN GR24436527
Contravention date 27 Nov 2025
Contravention time 09:54:00
Contravention location Blackwall Lane / Meantime Brewery
Penalty amount GBP 160.00
Contravention Entering and stopping in a box junction
Referral date -
Decision Date 19 May 2026
Adjudicator Elaine Vignoli
Appeal decision Appeal refused
Direction Full penalty charge notice amount stated to be paid within 28 days.
Reasons
I am asked to determine an appeal in relation to contravention code “31 - Entering and stopping in a box junction”, on 27 November 2025, at approximately 9:54am on Blackwall Lane/Meantime Brewery.

The Appellant appeals on the basis that the driver was attempting to enter through a gate the other side of the yellow box and had pulled as far off the box as they could, whilst waiting for the gates to be opened. I am afraid that this is not a basis in law to allow for stopping on a box junction. The contravention occurred and the Appellant’s arguments do not alter the liability.

Accordingly, the appeal is refused and the full penalty charge is payable.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NdqvRwZgPg

You could try contacting them

https://www.siteglasssouthernkent.co.uk/

https://www.siteglasssouthernkent.co.uk/contact-us

Even if they've paid (IIRC) they can apply for a review as long as the application i made in time.

Easy to contact them and tell them to ask for a review.

Note I've just posted a win at this location on the live case.

Thanks both - I've popped an email over to the company.  Will let you know if they come back to me.

Iwas under the impression that the contravention in yellow box cases only occurred if the vehicle was stopped due to the presence of another vehicle blocking the exit.

If this is not the case, then if someone runs out in the road in front of you on a yellow box and you stop, you'd be guilty of a contravention.

Total madness.

Your impression is correct!

I've contacted the company in question who confirmed they will be requesting a review of the decision.

I've contacted the company in question who confirmed they will be requesting a review of the decision.

Well done for a public service...
I hope you drew their attention to this forum?

I certainly did!

Is the adjudicator 'wet behind the ears'?

The lorry driver's option would have been to stop in the middle of the road, not in the bus lane, and wait for the gate to be opened, thereby causing a massive traffic jam while waiting.

Apart from the obvious balls-up re the lack of stationary vehicles, the box junction is also sited at an invalid location. It is required to be at a junction of two or more roads. The vehicular access to a gated brewery doesn't count as a road.

But otherwise the lorry driver is bang to rights.

Reviews are not DIY. I suggest proper representations. I am able to assist if nobody else wants to - do not want to tread upon anyone's toes.

2250677300

Is the adjudicator 'wet behind the ears'?

I cannot possibly comment. 

Iwas under the impression that the contravention in yellow box cases only occurred if the vehicle was stopped due to the presence of another vehicle blocking the exit.

If this is not the case, then if someone runs out in the road in front of you on a yellow box and you stop, you'd be guilty of a contravention.

Total madness.

@Korting: "Complaints@londoncouncils.gov.uk" <complaints@londoncouncils.gov.uk>