I wonder if anyone can help me out:
I received the following penalty charge notice ? I have reproduced it below in verbatim
The council of the London borough of Ealing believes that a penalty charge is payable with respect to the vehicle registration mark XXXXX for the alleged contravention of Entering and stopping in a box junction when prohibited in South Road ? Junction of St. Joseph?s Drive, UB1 on xxxxxx at xxxx.
The alleged contravention was noted by camera operator number 1025 who was observing real time pictures from a traffic enforcement camera at the time stated. The alleged contravention is supported by recorded video footage.
The stated video footage is provided with the notice.
As far as I can see (and understand) I appear to have broken ?Penalty Charge Notice contravention code 31 (Entering and stopping in a box junction when prohibited)? However the charge notice does not spell this out as required by the traffic act. Is my reasoning correct? If so, is this adequate grounds for challenging this notice.
Thanks in advance.
|
|
You need to speak to a firm of solicters who specialise in motoring offences and get a correct opinion whether its worth the hastle when you appear to have been guilty is another matter,magistrates do not like people who are guilty trying to get of on technicalities when its such a minor offence don't forget the UK is a Council controlled police state.
|
|
|
I would have thought that by the fact you knew which law you had broken by the wording on the FPN would indicate that the charge notice had spelt it out.
However at least we all now know that LB Ealing are using video evidence to nick drivers at the juntion of South Road / St Josephs drive.
Thanks for that.
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
Did you enter the box when your exit was not clear, except if you wanted to turn right and were prevented from doing so by oncoming traffic or other stationary vehicles waiting to turn right?
NO - appeal
YES - Pay.
As stated the Code for this is 31(London) and whilst the actual Code No does not seem to appear on the ticket there is sufficient information as to leave no doubt of the contravention and this complies with Section 66(3)(a) Road Traffic Act 1991 on issue of PCN.
Appeal: No apparent grounds
Pay: Yes.
dvd
|
Just pay the £60 fine (or whatever it is) and get on with your life. Learn from the experience and become a better driver by learning how box junctions work - they are there for a good reason!
|
Just pay the £60 fine (or whatever it is) and get on with your life. Learn from the experience and become a better driver by learning how box junctions work - they are there for a good reason!
Thank you for your words of wisdom.
|
|
|
|
Many thanks for the very comprehensive yet concise explanation. I know where I stand now. Thanks again.
CJay.
|
You are more than welcome for the explination. Although I still don't see the point of trying to wriggle out of it when it would appear from your post that you did in fact break the rules. You asked for advice, and thats what you got. The post from DVD completely sums the situation up - I can't see any way that you can get out of it. I understand how you feel - I've been in similiar situations, you probably feel cheated, wronged, hard done by etc - from my experiences it's sometimes best to just pay and get on with it - you fight the battles you can win. Refer to some of my previous posts on parking tickets and RFL.
If your post had read something like "I entered a box junction to turn right and got a PCN" - then I would support you 100% in challenging the PCN as there are times when the authorities must be challenged to keep them in check. Thin end of the wedge, police/nanny state etc etc...
I know that wikipedia shoudn't be quoted, but I'm going to anyway as it seems like a good explination to me.
"A box junction is a traffic control measure designed to prevent gridlock at busy road junctions. The surface of the junction is marked with a criss-cross grid of diagonal painted lines (or only two lines crossing each other in the box junction) and vehicles may not enter the area so marked unless their exit from the junction is clear (or, if turning, to await a gap in the oncoming traffic flow). In the United Kingdom, drivers may enter the box and wait when they want to turn right, and are only stopped from doing so by oncoming traffic, or by other vehicles waiting to turn right.
Similar yellow boxes may be painted on other areas of roadway (such as the exits from emergency vehicle depots) which must be kept free of queuing traffic."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I remeber in the 70's running out of fuel right in the middle of a busy junction in central london. a traffic warden was quickly on the scene and I was wondering which prison i would end up in and to my surprise he stopped the lot of trffic and helped me push the old Victor to the roadside and pointed me in the direction of a garage and stood guard until I got back! what a difference in attitudes now. I never go near London in a car now so I suppose Ken has won.
|
I turn right at a box junction on my way home from work every night, and one day last year received a PCN worded almost identically to the op's. I always, quite legally, pull into the box junction while waiting to turn right across the oncoming traffic.
I replied quoting the highway code and suggesting if the camera operator checked the footage again, he would clearly see my right hand indicator flashing, and my car turn right as soon as it was safe to do so. Never heard any more.
The point is, although most people are caught fair and square, these muppets do make mistakes from time to time.
Cheers
DP
|
Actually Ealing are a bit over-keen with their camera operators. They will try and nick you for putting a wheel in a bus lane passing traffic waiting to turn right at a junction. Roads are badly and ambiguously marked in places too.
In my opinion people should always argue about these PCNs through the post, unless they know they have been caught fairly. If you ask to see the famous video evidence they may not be able to produce it.
|
Agree with Lud on this one.
It seems a number of the London Boroughs are being successfully challenged on the use of CCTV and box junctions.
Some are following procedures and some are not and in some cases 2nd stage paperwork such as NTOs are non compliant therefore opening the way to appeal even if you are bang to rights and first stage documents are OK.
I suggest you head over to Pepipoo.com and enter the parking ticket forum, there are a number of threads in there about CCTV in London.
Indeed there is a member called Boxclever who, I believe has become something of a boffin on this topic and can tell you which boroughs are using complaint documents and which are not.
As always
Mark
|
Westminster have spent quite a few quid on a few CCTV-equipped Smart Cars, brought into service for just this.
However, I hear on the grapevine the they have fallen foul of the local traffic unit as they often plot up and cause more congestion than they're trying to detect!
|
Hi Cjay
I have had a run through some of the threads on the Pepipoo parking ticket forum and it seems that a number of the London Councils are encountering difficulty in sucessfully prosecuting box junction offences using CCTV for a variety of reasons.
It appears that defective documentation issued at 1st or 2nd stage is the case in some areas, not having photographic evidence which proves the event is also possible (although they may well initially claim to do so) and in some cases illegally marked box junctions not conforming to TRD regs in others.
heres a link to a successful appeal
tinyurl.com/3xmf9y
Looks like it might be worth enquiring on Pepipoo.com before handing over your £££ss to some local authority seat warmer.
HTH
As always
Mark
|
|
|
|
