DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 15775--------------------------------------------------
Redbridge PCN, Code 31j Stopping in a box junction, Horns Road
(A) / TFL, yellow box, near B&M
DIR By: zzzatang
Date: February 17, 2024, 5:31 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The ask: I need help from experts on the appeal letter.
I know everyone is busy and hence the ask is stated first.
Context:
I received a PCN letter from Redbridge Council dated
15-Feb-2024. I want to appeal this PCN. This Yellow Box Junction
(YBJ) is the council's big money spinner. I learned the hard way
of Googling it after I got the PCN. There are some inherent
design issues with it, as it stretches further than being in the
path of crossing traffic.
Grounds for appeal: [ Based on my research- I am listing all
possible reasons ]
1. Location is vague [ Screenshot
HTML https://app.box.com/s/dmfillj3195b3re75l48e26rx2sa8p6u
and
HTML https://app.box.com/s/6weoa0lz0yjs6ytp7fpfx0d0llilidry
& PCN
Letter
HTML https://app.box.com/s/gsce4yiynutxjls1pyclheokycp3hvrb
]
Where is Horns Road (A)? When I search for Horns Road (a) on the
OpenStreetmaps website (screenshot attached), even after
clicking for more results 2 times there is still no result on
the first page of search results which brings up the alleged
YBJ.
The location is blank on the Council's website
HTML https://my.redbridge.gov.uk/ParkingPCN
when I go to the Pay My
PCN page. (screenshot attached)
Potential appeal text: "The PCN does not state the location of
the yellow box junction. This is a long road and I am unable to
mount a defence if I don't know where the box is. Please see
case reference 2160240742 for an example of a previous appeal
allowed on such a point. "
2. Restricted View [ Screenshot
HTML https://app.box.com/s/i33lg5f7eli2tq13sm2cqmd1rm298aog
]
When nearing and entering the YBJ from Perrymans Farm Road and
turning left on the Horns Road, The B&M building, the hedges and
street furniture such as the railings prevent a clear view of
the Horns Road traffic further ahead. Especially, considering
the driver of a normal car (not SUV) is seated even below the
height of the car roof-mounted camera of the Streetview
recording car.
Text for an appeal:
I judged to the best of my ability that the exit side was clear
and there was sufficient space for my vehicle to fit. However
the attached image shows that the junction layout means
visibility to the exit is obscured by a building.
3. Space taken by other car
I started moving to enter Horns Road cautiously when the Red Car
came very aggressively to take the space that my car was going
to occupy. You can see that it takes a lot of time before
another car comes on top of the YBJ because it is not as
aggressive as the red car. The angle of the video camera on the
pole does not show this aspect of this incident and hence misses
a big context issue.
Text for an appeal:
Paragraph 11, part 7 of The Traffic Signs Regulations and
General Directions (TSRGD) 2016 states 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.”. From the driver's viewpoint, when I
started turning left and entered the box there was space to
receive my vehicle on the exit of the box, however it was taken
by another vehicle
4. Enough Space - Aggressive early stopping by the Red car is a
space-hogging issue [ Screenshot
HTML https://app.box.com/s/8f7b60ko4h6udshbywbaunslukdbj640
]
There is sufficient space for 3 cars in the area between the
white stop line at the signal (which was green) and the start of
the YJB. However, if the second car stops early then the third
car, especially when taking a left turn from the Perrymans Farm
Road gets stuck with one of the three wheels on the YJB. This
satellite view of this YBJ from Google Maps illustrates this
point. The angle of view of the Camera on the Pole installed by
the council does not allow for this judgement
Text to appeal:
The box ahead was clear and my stop was not caused by
"stationary vehicles" but rather by the unexpected actions (rash
driving and aggressive braking) of a single vehicle (red car)
ahead of me.
5. Space between my car and the Red car
I could have crept forward but because of rash driving by the
red car driver, I kept a bit more distance from his car. This
was my reaction to how he behaved. Also due to the turning
radius of the car and the starting point being the extreme left
side of the road, the car appears to be on the junction box.
However, as per the legislation, there was space for one car at
the time of entering the YBJ.
Text for an appeal:
Paragraph 11, part 7 of The Traffic Signs Regulations and
General Directions (TSRGD) 2016 states that stopping on a yellow
box is only an offence when stopped due to the presence of
stationary vehicles. My vehicle was not stopped for this
reason.
Another text for an appeal:
Paragraph 11, part 7 of The Traffic Signs Regulations and
General Directions (TSRGD) 2016 sates that stopping on a yellow
box is only an offence when stopped due to the presence of
stationary vehicles. There was a gap in front of the box in
front of my vehicle that was big enough to fit my vehicle. I
chose not to enter it therefore I was not stopped due to the
presence of "stationary vehicles". Please see case references
2220796242 and 2220698629 for similar examples allowed on
appeal.
6. Over Sized YBJ
As you can see in the Google Satellite View photo of the YJB in
question, it stretches way beyond the area that would be needed
by a car turning right from Perrymans Farm Road. I have attached
another example screenshot of a YBJ in Barkingside where it
doesn't stretch as far as the one in question does. [ Screenshot
HTML https://app.box.com/s/4p3gfmeo0wc2bgxupxwhsuv0nj6fv0u9
] I
understand this is difficult to use in an appeal.
Text for appeal:
This box extends beyond the junction and the extended area
serves no purpose. Schedule 7, Part 9, 11 (6) of the TSRGD 2016
sets out the permitted locations for yellow boxes and this
states it must be "(a) at a junction between two or more roads"
The attached image shows that this box extends beyond the
junction and is thus not "at" a junction. Please see case
references 2170285940 as an example of a previous case won on
this point in which the adjudicator stated: "A “box junction”
means an area of the carriageway where the marking has been
placed and which is at a junction between two or more roads.
Markings which extends beyond the junction of two or more roads
do not therefore mark out a box junction covered by the
prohibition. I am in no way suggesting that the Authority has to
be inch perfect but, in my view, extending the box junction by a
car length or more beyond the actual junction is neither
compliant nor substantially compliant with requirements.”
7. TWOC - Taken With Out Consent
This could be added to the list above. Though, I believe there
is some disagreement among experts here on whether it would
apply.
Attachments:
Video:
HTML https://youtu.be/d1Asb_LxDmI
I was unable to find a
download button on the council website, got help from someone to
screen capture
Redbridge council letter dated 15-Feb-2024:
HTML https://app.box.com/s/gsce4yiynutxjls1pyclheokycp3hvrb
Council PCN website has blank LOCATION Screenshot :
HTML https://app.box.com/s/dmfillj3195b3re75l48e26rx2sa8p6u
Bing StreetView Screenshot - restricted View for a driver
turning left:
HTML https://app.box.com/s/i33lg5f7eli2tq13sm2cqmd1rm298aog
OpenStreetMap search results horns road (a) Screenshot :
HTML https://app.box.com/s/6weoa0lz0yjs6ytp7fpfx0d0llilidry
Google Satellite Photo showing 3 cars barely fitting due to
middle car leaving excessive space :
HTML https://app.box.com/s/8f7b60ko4h6udshbywbaunslukdbj640
Screenshot Good YBJ Example in Barkingside :
HTML https://app.box.com/s/4p3gfmeo0wc2bgxupxwhsuv0nj6fv0u9
#Post#: 15781--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge PCN, Code 31j Stopping in a box junction, Horns
Road (A) / TFL, yellow box, near B&M
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: February 17, 2024, 7:52 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Re 7: may be so; but, you can include it as they must consider
it. Do you need my text re this?*
BTW, you received it on Monday 19th! The deemed date of
service.
*
The third ground on the PCN clearly limits to theft. I bring a
collateral challenge on the basis that the PCN is unenforceable
because the taken without consent ground clearly fetters to
theft by its very wording that a crime report be provided.
Therefore, this inaccurate reflection of the statutory ground
does not take into account that a relative, or friend, may have
taken the vehicle without the owner's permission so that the
owner would not necessarily, if at all, report the matter to the
Police in such circumstances or, indeed, make an insurance
claim.
#Post#: 15793--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge PCN, Code 31j Stopping in a box junction, Horns
Road (A) / TFL, yellow box, near B&M
DIR By: zzzatang
Date: February 17, 2024, 10:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Now I have added the video to the original post.
HTML https://youtu.be/d1Asb_LxDmI
It would be great if you could share your views on what else I
could add to the appeal and also opine on the points listed in
my original post.
#Post#: 15794--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge PCN, Code 31j Stopping in a box junction, Horns
Road (A) / TFL, yellow box, near B&M
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: February 17, 2024, 10:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I do not agree re the red car. It was their right of way. Also,
the vague locus could be rebutted as there are other clear signs
indicated. Just being pragmatic.
#Post#: 16492--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge PCN, Code 31j Stopping in a box junction, Horns
Road (A) / TFL, yellow box, near B&M
DIR By: zzzatang
Date: February 28, 2024, 10:55 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
re red car: During periods of heavy traffic, such as the one
when I was near the yellow box junction, the usual practice is
that one vehicle joins junction from each side. On that basis, I
had visual contact with the driver of the white car and had let
it pass first. I was expecting to join behind that car, however
to my surprise the red car tailgated the white car at very high
speed.
#Post#: 16493--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge PCN, Code 31j Stopping in a box junction, Horns
Road (A) / TFL, yellow box, near B&M
DIR By: zzzatang
Date: February 28, 2024, 11:35 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
1. I have composed an appeals letter (here:
HTML https://app.box.com/s/ra0zxqpm2mvhb0mo94iij8g3k9rnialr
). It
would be great if you could provide feedback on how to improve
it or make it more legally accurate. Please feel free to
download , make changes and upload your edited version - if you
find it easier to do so.
2. Regarding the text highlighted in yellow in points 1, 2, 3, 4
and 5, I am unsure whether to add this highlighted additional
text information elaborating these points in the appeal letter.
Please advise whether it is advisable to add this additional
info.
3. Should I keep or remove point-8 that I have sourced from the
appeal letter posted in this thread
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/redbridge-pcn-entering-and-stopping-in-a-box-junction-high-road-goodmayes-31j/
4. Lastly, the PCN is dated 15-Feb-2024 and as
[member=24]Hippocrates[/member] has kindly highlighted the date
served would be 19-Feb-2024. My question is do I need to submit
the appeal by 29-Feb-2024 to qualify for the reduced 65 GBP
penalty payment if the appeal is rejected? or do I have 14 days
from the deemed date of service to retain the reduced rate?
Here is the Google maps Streetview url:
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/AWMrornh8UJjy2GE6
[Just noticed I had
not added this to my original post]
#Post#: 16555--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge PCN, Code 31j Stopping in a box junction, Horns
Road (A) / TFL, yellow box, near B&M
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: February 29, 2024, 1:47 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=1257]zzzatang[/member] I'm not sure there's anything
wrong with the road description given you can find it with a
simple google search:
HTML https://i.imgur.com/tMX84PH.png
I think it would be much better if you simply counter the number
of yellow boxes on the road (will require you to check on google
maps) and then we can see if we can draw a parallel to the
Shaftesbury Avenue case. I don't see that the location on the
council website has any significance, either the statutory PCN
gives you enough details or it doesn't.
I don't think the restricted view argument gets you anywhere, it
seems to me that the image you rely on shows that the view is
perfectly fine.
Points 3,4 and 5, with respect, look unarguable (that's the
polite way of saying they're nonsense).
Point 6 is irrelevant as your car was at the junction.
Point 7 is arguable but I'm not sure many adjudicators accept
it.
Point 8 is wrong in law and you should not pursue it because if
you argue it at the tribunal, you'd be seeking to mislead the
tribunal as to the law. A complete answer to the point is found
in paragraph 5 of Schedule 1 to the London Local Authorities and
Transport for London Act 2003, and we don't mislead the tribunal
as that would be a criminal offence. Making false or misleading
representations to the authority is also a criminal offence. The
fact that such offences might seldom if ever be prosecuted is
irrelevant.
You've asked me to set up a link with a counter which I'm happy
to do, a link to what please?
I honestly think the first point is the best one but you really
need to count how many box junctions there are on this road.
#Post#: 16594--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge PCN, Code 31j Stopping in a box junction, Horns
Road (A) / TFL, yellow box, near B&M
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: March 1, 2024, 6:58 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Received PM. Point 8 argument has had success over the years at
the Tribunal but is now more or less otiose. I do not agree
that anyone advancing this argument would be deliberately or
otherwise attempting to mislead the Tribunal; however, it
doesn't work anymore and, in the last case won (October 2022)
that same adjudicator now seems to have changed his mind.
Indeed, it wasn't even argued at the hearing - rather the
failure to consider it. But, he allowed it on that point anyway!
The TWOC ground should be included to test their response. If
they make one. I have a live case in which they did not reply to
it.
#Post#: 16595--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge PCN, Code 31j Stopping in a box junction, Horns
Road (A) / TFL, yellow box, near B&M
DIR By: zzzatang
Date: March 1, 2024, 7:08 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: cp8759 link ---
>
> [member=1257]zzzatang[/member] I'm not sure there's anything
wrong with the road description given you can find it with a
simple google search:
>
> [img width=1099.9923095703125
height=890.9954223632812]
HTML https://i.imgur.com/tMX84PH.png[/img]
>
> I think it would be much better if you simply counter the
number of yellow boxes on the road (will require you to check on
google maps) and then we can see if we can draw a parallel to
the Shaftesbury Avenue case. I don't see that the location on
the council website has any significance, either the statutory
PCN gives you enough details or it doesn't.
>
> I don't think the restricted view argument gets you anywhere,
it seems to me that the image you rely on shows that the view is
perfectly fine.
>
> Points 3,4 and 5, with respect, look unarguable (that's the
polite way of saying they're nonsense).
>
> Point 6 is irrelevant as your car was at the junction.
>
> Point 7 is arguable but I'm not sure many adjudicators accept
it.
>
> Point 8 is wrong in law and you should not pursue it because
if you argue it at the tribunal, you'd be seeking to mislead the
tribunal as to the law. A complete answer to the point is found
in paragraph 5 of Schedule 1 to the London Local Authorities and
Transport for London Act 2003, and we don't mislead the tribunal
as that would be a criminal offence. Making false or misleading
representations to the authority is also a criminal offence. The
fact that such offences might seldom if ever be prosecuted is
irrelevant.
>
> You've asked me to set up a link with a counter which I'm
happy to do, a link to what please?
>
> I honestly think the first point is the best one but you
really need to count how many box junctions there are on this
road.
>
--- End Quote ---
[member=1]cp8759[/member] thanks for your response.
There is unfortunately only one Yellow Box Junction on Horns
Road in Redbridge. I do agree having two or more YBJ would have
been ideal grounds for appeal.
With regards to points:
#1 Location. The PCN only states "HORNS ROAD (A)" and not "Horns
road, redbridge" as you have searched in Google Maps. If we are
going to appeal on a technicality that the location is vague
then this might become an important point to search what they
have provided exactly. IMHO
#2 Restricted View: Turning left vs going straight into YBJ (as
the camera is facing) are two different angles and do not
provide the same amount of information. The long traffic pile up
on the road after the signal is not visible as a person
approaches the junction intending to turn left. I could see the
green signal and no cars on the left, while a white car
approached the junction on the right.
#3, 4, 5: I appreciate you think they are nonsense. However,
most people enter a junction based on their judgement of space
on the other side and they are unable to clearly exit for
various reasons - including me. The key point is that the
legislation states there should be enough space for a car when
entering the junction, there is nothing wrong in stopping over
the junction for any reason except for stationary vehicles.
Here are two images to consider [attach=1] and [attach=2]
Looking at these images, I perceive there is space for 3 cars
(especially if one is a small hatchback). My point is that the
red car left too much space in front of it. Also since I was
taking a left turn, there was more space in front of my car on
the driver's side that would have fit my car if I was coming
straight from the other side of the junction instead of taking a
turn. It was also that I did not want to be too close to the red
car just to clear the junction. The Google satellite image
exactly shows the situation my car was in, with more space ahead
of 2nd car and the third car taking a left turn. Maybe it could
be that I need to elaborate on this further in the letter or
rephrase these points!
#6 [attach=1]
The image attached with this message has markings to better
illustrate the overhanging part of the YBJ which is not
meaningfully required or ever used for any car going straight on
the opposite road or taking a right. Hence the argument that the
YBJ is bigger than what is needed.
#7 has been added based on advice given on this thread by
[member=24]Hippocrates[/member]
#8 has been added from a previous thread here:
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/kingston-borough-council-31j-stopping-in-a-box-junction-(richmond-road-junction-/<br
/>
This ground for appeal has been cited multiple times on this
forum for me to believe it is a genuine point. So, given my
limited knowledge of law, I do not think I am misleading anyone
on this.
In the same thread (cite above), if you look at the 5th message
from you... the following is mentioned:
"[member=992]wolvoman[/member] I will PM you a link to put in
the representation, it will redirect to here but if you give
them the link I'll PM you, we can use the click count to confirm
whether they've looked at it or not (obviously do not click on
that link yourself as we want the click count to remain at
zero). If they don't click on 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."
I was referring to this link counter for the evidence for #8
However, now it seems you no longer believe in #8 as a ground
for an appeal, based on your response above.
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 16596--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge PCN, Code 31j Stopping in a box junction, Horns
Road (A) / TFL, yellow box, near B&M
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: March 1, 2024, 7:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Re conflation argument: this has worked in the distant past and
submitted in good faith. Indeed, I have won the large majority
of cases on this point. But:
1. The adjudicators who have allowed have changed their minds or
2. They have left.
Up to you. Personally, I would omit it. The "or" is either
dysfunctional or conjunctional. Whatever, the law is a mess in
terms of its expression and only Newham get it right by
separating the two periods and making it clear.
I have even asked for a panel decision but this was refused too.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 7
DIR Next Page