DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 60957--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge PCN - 31j - Entering and stopping in a yellow box
junction when prohibited (camera enforcement)
DIR By: MrChips
Date: March 6, 2025, 9:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Also one where the owner's daughter stopped in the box junction
to change the station on the car radio.
#Post#: 60966--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge PCN - 31j - Entering and stopping in a yellow box
junction when prohibited (camera enforcement)
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: March 6, 2025, 10:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Examples of adjudicators ruling that drivers did not stop due to
stationary vehicles
Case ref
Appellant
Authority
Date & time
Location
Decision Date
Adjudicator
Decision
2230553462
Jack Noble
London Borough of Waltham Forest
27 Oct 2023 15:38:00
Lea Bridge Road / Argall Way
24 Jan 2024
Andrew Harman
Appeal allowed
Mr Murray-Smith, for the appellant, attended the hearing today
via telephone. The council did not do so either via telephone or
in person. The contravention alleged in these proceedings was
that this vehicle entered and stopped in a box junction when
prohibited. I was atisfied on the basis of Mr Murray-Smith's
submissions as set out in his skeleton argument of 26/12/23
uploaded to the case on that date, to which the council had not
responded, that this vehicle in stopping as it did on box
junction markings stopped short. It did not I found do so due to
the presence of stationery vehicles. I was accordingly satisfied
that the contravention had not occurred. The appeal was allowed
without consideration of any other issue raised by either party
to the proceedings.
Case ref
Appellant
Authority
Date & time
Location
Decision Date
Adjudicator
Decision
2160252038
alan branch
London Borough of Waltham Forest
24 Apr 2016 16:44:00
Hall Lane/Albert Crescent
11 Jul 2016
Gerald Styles
Appeal allowed
​​The Council did not send a representative.
​
The appellant brought with him a freehand sketch in plan to
explain and support his argument that the driver could have
cleared the box without stopping for the 12 or so seconds
recorded. I have retained this and accepted the measurements as
shown.
​
The appellant's daughter Rebecca is shown driving on the clip. I
understood she had passed her test two years ago. I have
accepted that she could have cleared the box without stopping
within it. In the event the rear wheels straddled the far
perimeter.
​
She may through inexperience have misjudged the length of her
father's car but I do not incline to allow an appeal of this
type on that account. An obvious feature of the evidence was
that when she stopped, that she did so for the purpose of
adjusting controls on her music. I was inclined to be very
critical of her taking her eyes off the road as she did and when
she chose to do that. I did however conclude there was
insufficient evidence to support this particular penalty charge
as I could not attribute the reason for stopping as being
essentially the presence of stationary vehicles, as opposed to
preoccupation with what was playing music. I have recorded the
appeal as allowed.
#Post#: 61009--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge PCN - 31j - Entering and stopping in a yellow box
junction when prohibited (camera enforcement)
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: March 6, 2025, 2:54 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=7]mrmustard[/member]
HTML https://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/sites/default/files/keycases/SKMBT_C454e14031218240.pdf
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 2
DIR Previous Page