DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 16205--------------------------------------------------
PCN for 3-point turn with no prohibited signage for U-turn.
DIR By: antman40
Date: February 25, 2024, 6:46 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hello.
I've received another PCN from Waltham Forest. I only used the
space to reverse and do a 3-point turn then back onto a two-way
road (Acacia Road) there are no camera enforcement signs mounted
anywhere on Acacia Road neither are there traffic signs
prohibiting U-turns and I did not drive fully into Verulam
Avenue. Video footage did not highlight 'CONTRAVENTION'.
Can anybody kindly assist with an appeal on this? Thank you.
HTML https://imgur.com/a/iZvq6Ss
#Post#: 16207--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for 3-point turn with no prohibited signage for U-turn.
DIR By: martin_t
Date: February 25, 2024, 7:35 am
---------------------------------------------------------
But there is 'prohibited signage' preventing entry into Verulam
Avenue.
#Post#: 16208--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for 3-point turn with no prohibited signage for U-turn.
DIR By: 666
Date: February 25, 2024, 8:11 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: martin_t link ---
>
> But there is 'prohibited signage' preventing entry into
Verulam Avenue.
>
--- End Quote ---
There is indeed. And there is no need for "camera enforcement
signs".
#Post#: 16209--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for 3-point turn with no prohibited signage for U-turn.
DIR By: 666
Date: February 25, 2024, 8:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
And the lack of "No U-Turn" signs is irrelevant, since the OP
wasn't doing a U-turn, and hasn't been charged with that.
#Post#: 16210--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for partly reversing into a 'no entry' with 3-point
turn.
DIR By: antman40
Date: February 25, 2024, 8:36 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The PCN is for contravention 51- Failing to comply with a
no-entry sign. The vehicle did not drive the whole vehicle's
length into the road or 10 metres into the road it only did a
reversing manoeuvre, a 3-point turn as seen in the video.
Surely a contravention can only stand if a vehicle fully drives
through a prohibited sign as in the video footage this did not
occur.
#Post#: 16211--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for partly reversing into a 'no entry' with 3-point
turn.
DIR By: 666
Date: February 25, 2024, 8:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: antman40 link ---
>
>
>
> Surely a contravention can only stand if a vehicle fully
drives through a prohibited sign as in the video footage this
did not occur.
>
--- End Quote ---
Whatever makes you think that?
The sign means "No entry for vehicular traffic": no ifs or buts.
#Post#: 16213--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for 3-point turn with no prohibited signage for U-turn.
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: February 25, 2024, 9:00 am
---------------------------------------------------------
IMO the best you could argue is de minimis and you did not see
the sign as you were reversing. They will reject of course. I
saw the video.
#Post#: 16239--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for 3-point turn with no prohibited signage for U-turn.
DIR By: antman40
Date: February 25, 2024, 12:21 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
De Minimis? How do I use this in an appeal?
#Post#: 16242--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for 3-point turn with no prohibited signage for U-turn.
DIR By: 666
Date: February 25, 2024, 12:39 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: antman40 link ---
>
> De Minimis? How do I use this in an appeal?
>
--- End Quote ---
The legal maxim is "de minimis non curat lex", which is usually
translated as "the law does not concern itself with trifles". So
you need to argue (and evidence) that you only crossed the line
by a trifling amount - 3", 6" or whatever.
As above, I don't give much for your chances.
#Post#: 16247--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for 3-point turn with no prohibited signage for U-turn.
DIR By: taffer87
Date: February 25, 2024, 2:55 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Video here -
HTML https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/gpffuoljdse4ztne8p36l/video.mp4.mov?rlkey=9672fb50o8k8bjsk31n6x3sc1&dl=0
no sympathy from council likely but should be a good chance at
Tribunal for de minimis
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 4
DIR Next Page