DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 129145--------------------------------------------------
Re: Yellow Box PCN
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: August 29, 2026, 5:07 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Have you requested a review of the case ?
#Post#: 129149--------------------------------------------------
Re: Yellow Box PCN
DIR By: bricemanuk
Date: August 29, 2026, 5:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Incandescent link ---
>
> Have you requested a review of the case ?
>
--- End Quote ---
Not yet. I’m not sure what grounds I could request a review on.
What do you think?
I’m a bit frustrated with the way the adjudicator dealt with my
main argument, especially as it wasn't addressed in the
decision. Is this kind of thing normal at the tribunal, or have
I just been particularly unlucky with this adjudicator?
#Post#: 129157--------------------------------------------------
Re: Yellow Box PCN
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: August 29, 2026, 7:09 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If the adjudicator omitted to deal with your main point then a
request for a review is valid, I think. You only have 14 days
from the decision to request one. Ask for one in the "interest
of justice"
#Post#: 129160--------------------------------------------------
Re: Yellow Box PCN
DIR By: bricemanuk
Date: August 29, 2026, 7:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Incandescent link ---
>
> If the adjudicator omitted to deal with your main point then a
request for a review is valid, I think. You only have 14 days
from the decision to request one. Ask for one in the "interest
of justice"
>
--- End Quote ---
I'll definitely give it a try It's just mad that the main issue
that needed to be adjudicated was never actually adjudicated, it
makes me wonder what purpose the adjudication and hearing
served. The decision was based on points that I never disputed,
ridiculous. Hopefully, whoever reviews the decision next will
take a more balanced view.
#Post#: 129161--------------------------------------------------
Re: Yellow Box PCN
DIR By: tincombe
Date: August 29, 2026, 8:40 am
---------------------------------------------------------
IMO, paras. 5,6 and 7 deal with every point raised, albeit with
brevity which is unusual, and I cannot see the adjudicator's
findings of fact being interfered with in any review.
The video shows you causing the vehicle to enter the box;
The adjudicator found as facts from what they saw in the video
that:
The box was substantially compliant, which you argued to
the contrary;
You stopped because of the presence of stationary
vehicles, which you
argued to the contrary.
That's it in terms of the legal tests, IMO.
...conveys the prohibition that a person must not cause a
vehicle to enter the box junction so that the vehicle has to
stop within the box junction due to the presence of stationary
vehicles.
For the purposes of this paragraph “box junction” means an area
of the carriageway where the marking has been placed and which
is—
(a)at a junction between two or more roads;
(b)at a gyratory system or roundabout.
#Post#: 129168--------------------------------------------------
Re: Yellow Box PCN
DIR By: bricemanuk
Date: August 29, 2026, 10:31 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: tincombe link ---
>
> IMO, paras. 5,6 and 7 deal with every point raised, albeit
with brevity which is unusual, and I cannot see the
adjudicator's findings of fact being interfered with in any
review.
>
> The video shows you causing the vehicle to enter the box;
> The adjudicator found as facts from what they saw in the video
that:
> The box was substantially compliant, which you argued to the
contrary;
> You stopped because of the presence of stationary vehicles,
which you
> argued to the contrary.
>
> That's it in terms of the legal tests, IMO.
>
> ...conveys the prohibition that a person must not cause a
vehicle to enter the box junction so that the vehicle has to
stop within the box junction due to the presence of stationary
vehicles.
>
> For the purposes of this paragraph “box junction” means an
area of the carriageway where the marking has been placed and
which is—
>
> (a)at a junction between two or more roads;
>
> (b)at a gyratory system or roundabout.
>
--- End Quote ---
I understand the point, but I don't believe the decision
actually makes the finding you describe. It finds that there
were stationary vehicles ahead and that my vehicle stopped, but
I cannot see where it finds or explains that those vehicles
caused me to have to stop, which was the specific point I
disputed. I never disputed the other facts, but the wording of
the law does say “has to stop”, doesn’t it?
At the time, I was actually able to continue moving slowly until
the traffic started moving again. The fact that I chose not to
do so does not mean that I had to stop.
This is exactly why the whole adjudication process feels like a
joke to me. It feels as though an adjudicator can approach a
case with a particular conclusion in mind and then pick out the
facts that support that conclusion, while simply not dealing
with the point that does not fit it. In my case, the one issue I
actually disputed was never properly answered, yet the decision
relies on facts I never disputed in the first place. That makes
the outcome feel less like an independent adjudication of the
actual dispute and more like it depends on which adjudicator
happens to deal with your case and how they choose to look at
it.
#Post#: 129175--------------------------------------------------
Re: Yellow Box PCN
DIR By: tincombe
Date: August 29, 2026, 12:35 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
'I find that the Council has established that the vehicle
stopped as alleged in the Penalty Charge Notice....'
You can request a review and lose nothing by doing so, but
remember that by doing so the enforcement clock does not stop
i.e. you have to pay within the 28-day period direction in the
decision. But adjudicators are aware of this and tend to respond
promptly.
When does your 14-day period for requesting a review end?
#Post#: 129176--------------------------------------------------
Re: Yellow Box PCN
DIR By: bricemanuk
Date: August 29, 2026, 1:11 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: tincombe link ---
>
> 'I find that the Council has established that the vehicle
stopped as alleged in the Penalty Charge Notice....'
>
> You can request a review and lose nothing by doing so, but
remember that by doing so the enforcement clock does not stop
i.e. you have to pay within the 28-day period direction in the
decision. But adjudicators are aware of this and tend to respond
promptly.
>
> When does your 14-day period for requesting a review end?
>
--- End Quote ---
The decision was made yesterday and I've already submitted the
request for review today. Hopefully, the review can be finished
within 28 days. I'll make a payment if I don't hear anything
back in 26 days.
#Post#: 129178--------------------------------------------------
Re: Yellow Box PCN
DIR By: MrChips
Date: August 29, 2026, 2:17 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I tend to agree - the crux of your appeal was not a denial that
you stopped due to stationary vehicles. It was a denial that you
had to do so.
#Post#: 129179--------------------------------------------------
Re: Yellow Box PCN
DIR By: bricemanuk
Date: August 29, 2026, 3:54 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: MrChips link ---
>
> I tend to agree - the crux of your appeal was not a denial
that you stopped due to stationary vehicles. It was a denial
that you had to do so.
>
--- End Quote ---
That's actually what happened. I chose to stop because I
realised the traffic had suddenly stalled. I didn't keep moving
slowly because I thought I wasn't blocking the junction and that
it would be fine to stop where I was, rather than creeping
forward simply for the sake of not coming to a stop. In the end,
I was effectively penalised for trying to avoid causing an
obstruction. I stopped where it marked unnecessary area.
[img width=960
height=460]
HTML https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/d/1xxNpBayAoD6CowkflaS5juPl847ndWvg[/img]
*****************************************************
Page 3 of 4
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page