DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 11537--------------------------------------------------
PN74336538 Romford Rd, Newham Council - 31j Entering and
stopping in a box junction when prohibited (camera enforcement)
DIR By: zincy
Date: November 29, 2023, 9:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Dear All,
I hope that you are well.
PCN is here:
HTML https://ibb.co/CKFN7Jn
Video footage is here:
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzQlNSHtsO4
Google maps link:
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/YEjFoS6eNQSKvnFQ9
I would be grateful for your advice if there is any way for me
to appeal this?
Thanks
Zincy
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 11606--------------------------------------------------
Re: PN74336538 Romford Rd, Newham Council - 31j Entering and
stopping in a box junction when prohibited (camera enforcem
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: November 29, 2023, 5:57 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Oh dear, no response yet ?
Well, sorry to have to tell you that at first glance of the
video, and your other attachments, I don't see any obvious
"killer" appeal argument that would win at London Tribunals.
The video shows you driving into the box without any hesitation
at all following a car that then stops just beyond the YBJ thus
forcing you to stop in the box for 6 seconds. YOu might say,
"well, I didn't know he'd stop and prevent me exiting the box",
but your situation is what the law is designed to penalise.
Essentially, in traffic, you should not enter a box without
having your exit worked out. You might say 6 seonds this is a
very short time, but as somebody who has thrown a hand-grenade,
(only on the range, mind you !), 6 seconds seems a very long
time indeed before it goes off bang ! Certainly I don't think
you'd win on a de minimis basis at the adjudicators, London
Tribunals, although you can try it. If you do, the full PCN
penalty will be in play, there is no discount at adjudication.
Sorry not to be more positive, but we deal in reality here. In
a situation like yours it is always best to try to tootle slowly
across the YBJ in the hope the car in front will start moving.
#Post#: 11614--------------------------------------------------
Re: PN74336538 Romford Rd, Newham Council - 31j Entering and
stopping in a box junction when prohibited (camera enforcem
DIR By: zincy
Date: November 30, 2023, 3:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks, I appreciate realism.
I will wait to see if CP has an alternate view and if not, will
just have to pay it within the discount window.
#Post#: 11616--------------------------------------------------
Re: PN74336538 Romford Rd, Newham Council - 31j Entering and
stopping in a box junction when prohibited (camera enforcem
DIR By: guest17
Date: November 30, 2023, 3:52 am
---------------------------------------------------------
In the past that yellow box was well beyond the junction but
they shortened it.
The lines are badly degraded but I doubt that would provide
sufficient grounds for a successful appeal.
Got to agree with Inc, discount looks the best option.
Mike
#Post#: 11618--------------------------------------------------
Re: PN74336538 Romford Rd, Newham Council - 31j Entering and
stopping in a box junction when prohibited (camera enforcem
DIR By: zincy
Date: November 30, 2023, 5:35 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: MMV Redux link ---
>
> In the past that yellow box was well beyond the junction but
they shortened it.
>
> The lines are badly degraded but I doubt that would provide
sufficient grounds for a successful appeal.
>
> Got to agree with Inc, discount looks the best option.
>
> Mike
>
--- End Quote ---
Thanks Mike - it looks like we may need to pay...unless...CP can
weave some magic?
#Post#: 11778--------------------------------------------------
Re: PN74336538 Romford Rd, Newham Council - 31j Entering and
stopping in a box junction when prohibited (camera enforcem
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: December 2, 2023, 12:23 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: zincy link ---
>
> Thanks Mike - it looks like we may need to pay...unless...CP
can weave some magic?
>
--- End Quote ---
I'm working on it, give me a few hours please.
#Post#: 11785--------------------------------------------------
Re: PN74336538 Romford Rd, Newham Council - 31j Entering and
stopping in a box junction when prohibited (camera enforcem
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: December 2, 2023, 7:05 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Frame by frame analysis shows the vehicle stopped from 22.040
seconds to 16.560 into the video, which is a total stopping time
of 5.48 seconds.
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wWk-fcy_Iw
This is very much at the upper end of what can be considered
de-minimis, but if we put the matter to the authority it might
cause a failure to consider.
Draft reps:
[indent]
Dear London Borough of Newham,
I challenge liability on the basis that the alleged
contravention did not occur. I have played the footage frame by
frame and my vehicle was stationary for less than six seconds, I
refer you to the footage at (insert link here) which shows the
video being played one frame at a time.
In light of the stopping time proven by this footage, I invite
you to cancel the PCN.
Yours faithfully
[/indent]
Don't use the link above, I will PM you a link to put in the
representation, we can use the view count to confirm whether
they've looked at it or not (obviously do not click on that link
yourself as we want the view count to remain at zero). If they
don't view it, we can then prove they've failed to consider all
of the evidence. If they say in the rejection that they've
considered all the evidence, we've got them for lying as well.
#Post#: 11792--------------------------------------------------
Re: PN74336538 Romford Rd, Newham Council - 31j Entering and
stopping in a box junction when prohibited (camera enforcem
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: December 3, 2023, 4:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The link is analysis of the raw material which the council
already has. Frame by frame is something they're perfectly
capable of doing for themselves, therefore as the link doesn't
represent fresh evidence I could see an adjudicator taking the
'it's just a hijack manoeuvre' view and disregard any appeal
based upon this point.
Which would leave the OP with the full penalty for what is a
bang-to-rights contravention.
However, if they re-offer the discount for unsuccessful reps
then nothing's to be lost and perhaps another flaw will arise.
But if we don't know that the authority would re-offer the
discount then OP, you've got to ask yourself a question: do you
feel lucky?
#Post#: 11832--------------------------------------------------
Re: PN74336538 Romford Rd, Newham Council - 31j Entering and
stopping in a box junction when prohibited (camera enforcem
DIR By: zincy
Date: December 4, 2023, 4:59 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: cp8759 link ---
>
> Frame by frame analysis shows the vehicle stopped from 22.040
seconds to 16.560 into the video, which is a total stopping time
of 5.48 seconds.
>
>
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wWk-fcy_Iw
>
> This is very much at the upper end of what can be considered
de-minimis, but if we put the matter to the authority it might
cause a failure to consider.
>
> Draft reps:
>
> [indent]
> Dear London Borough of Newham,
>
> I challenge liability on the basis that the alleged
contravention did not occur. I have played the footage frame by
frame and my vehicle was stationary for less than six seconds, I
refer you to the footage at (insert link here) which shows the
video being played one frame at a time.
>
> In light of the stopping time proven by this footage, I invite
you to cancel the PCN.
>
> Yours faithfully
> [/indent]
>
>
> Don't use the link above, I will PM you a link to put in the
representation, we can use the view count to confirm whether
they've looked at it or not (obviously do not click on that link
yourself as we want the view count to remain at zero). If they
don't view it, we can then prove they've failed to consider all
of the evidence. If they say in the rejection that they've
considered all the evidence, we've got them for lying as well.
>
--- End Quote ---
Thanks CP - I really appreciate this - unfortunately my friend
was nearing the 50% discount deadline and decided to pay before
your response PS on that note my FTLA 'Notify me of replies.'
were going to my junk which I have now sorted so hoping I do not
miss timely reminders in the future.
Again, I really appreciate yours and all elses time and help.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1