DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Speeding and other criminal offences
*****************************************************
#Post#: 52161--------------------------------------------------
Re: Pelican pedestrian crossing or Parked on pavement argument ?
DIR By: mdann52
Date: January 6, 2025, 12:13 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
There is one possibility here.
The offence wording of "Stop a Vehicle Within Pelican Crossing
Limits" corresponds to the ZP97001 offence code. This then
continues:
[I]Contrary to regulation 18 of the Zebra, Pelican and Puffin
Pedestrian Crossings Regulations 1997, section 25(5) of the Road
Traffic Regulation Act 1984 and Schedule 2 of the Road Traffic
Offenders Act 1988.[/I]
Now... The Zebra, Pelican and Puffin Pedestrian Crossings
Regulations 1997 have been repealed, so they cannot prosecute
you under that act. Legislation.gov likes to pretend it hasn't,
but it has.
They should have given you a CoFP you with "Failing to Comply
with a S36 Traffic Sign (endorsable) (manned equipment)"
instead.
So if you are feeling lucky, you can ignore the CoFP, wait for
the police to go to court, and hope they attempt to charge you
under the incorrect act.
#Post#: 52162--------------------------------------------------
Re: Pelican pedestrian crossing or Parked on pavement argument ?
DIR By: Rallyman72
Date: January 6, 2025, 12:26 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: mdann52 link ---
>
> There is one possibility here.
>
> The offence wording of "Stop a Vehicle Within Pelican Crossing
Limits" corresponds to the ZP97001 offence code. This then
continues:
>
> Contrary to regulation 18 of the Zebra, Pelican and Puffin
Pedestrian Crossings Regulations 1997, section 25(5) of the Road
Traffic Regulation Act 1984 and Schedule 2 of the Road Traffic
Offenders Act 1988.
>
> Now... The Zebra, Pelican and Puffin Pedestrian Crossings
Regulations 1997 have been repealed, so they cannot prosecute
you under that act. Legislation.gov likes to pretend it hasn't,
but it has.
>
> They should have given you a CoFP you with "Failing to Comply
with a S36 Traffic Sign (endorsable) (manned equipment)"
instead.
>
> So if you are feeling lucky, you can ignore the CoFP, wait for
the police to go to court, and hope they attempt to charge you
under the incorrect act.
>
--- End Quote ---
What about the Pelican Pedestrian Crossings Regulations and
General Directions 1987.
#Post#: 52291--------------------------------------------------
Re: Pelican pedestrian crossing or Parked on pavement argument ?
DIR By: The Slithy Tove
Date: January 7, 2025, 10:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Rallyman72 link ---
>
> What about the Pelican Pedestrian Crossings Regulations and
General Directions 1987.
>
--- End Quote ---
I'm open to be corrected, but I thought it's all been subsumed
into the latest TSRGD.
#Post#: 52293--------------------------------------------------
Re: Pelican pedestrian crossing or Parked on pavement argument ?
DIR By: 666
Date: January 7, 2025, 10:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Rallyman72 link ---
>
> [
> What about the Pelican Pedestrian Crossings Regulations and
General Directions 1987.
>
--- End Quote ---
Essentially revoked by the The Zebra, Pelican and Puffin
Pedestrian Crossings Regulations and General Directions 1997.
Revoked in turn by The Traffic Signs Regulations and General
Directions 2016
#Post#: 52346--------------------------------------------------
Re: Pelican pedestrian crossing or Parked on pavement argument ?
DIR By: Logician
Date: January 7, 2025, 5:47 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The problem with ignoring the fixed penalty, so that you are
charged, hopefuly under the wrong act and have to go to court is
that it is a high risk strategy, if it fails you could end up
seriously out of pocket financially and no one can tell you your
chances of success, but the court legal advisor may well not be
clued up on the obscurities of this legislation and will be
unlikely to be sympathetic to a legalistic defence if you are
charged under the wrong legislation and you will be arguing a
legal point before him/her. If you are charged under the correct
legislation you will have to argue the point made by the
policeman, or plead guilty. While it is interesting for the
posters here, I think the smart thing is to accept the fixed
penalty.
#Post#: 52349--------------------------------------------------
Re: Pelican pedestrian crossing or Parked on pavement argument ?
DIR By: andy_foster
Date: January 7, 2025, 6:24 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
If the charge is technically "wrong" but (including the
statement of facts) addresses the same wrong-doing, the court
would almost certainly amend the charge if the issue is raised.
In order to exploit any such error (and I am far from convinced
that there is a fatal error), the OP would need to be convicted
by the magistrates without the charge being amended and then
appeal against conviction to the Crown Court.
#Post#: 52364--------------------------------------------------
Re: Pelican pedestrian crossing or Parked on pavement argument ?
DIR By: NewJudge
Date: January 8, 2025, 3:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
There is also the problem that, as far as I know, the
prosecution can amend the charge up to the opening of their case
at the trial. If anyone who knows what they are doing sees the
papers before then that is likely to happen.
#Post#: 52396--------------------------------------------------
Re: Pelican pedestrian crossing or Parked on pavement argument ?
DIR By: Southpaw82
Date: January 8, 2025, 6:13 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: NewJudge link ---
>
> There is also the problem that, as far as I know, the
prosecution can amend the charge up to the opening of their case
at the trial. If anyone who knows what they are doing sees the
papers before then that is likely to happen.
>
--- End Quote ---
IIRC it can be amended up to verdict. Not checked for a while.
#Post#: 52402--------------------------------------------------
Re: Pelican pedestrian crossing or Parked on pavement argument ?
DIR By: Alessio
Date: January 8, 2025, 6:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I have decided to accept the fixed penalty .
Paid the fine and posted the driving licence details over .
Thanks to all of you for your time and valuable advise
#Post#: 52404--------------------------------------------------
Re: Pelican pedestrian crossing or Parked on pavement argument ?
DIR By: Southpaw82
Date: January 8, 2025, 6:35 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Alessio link ---
>
> I have decided to accept the fixed penalty .
> Paid the fine and posted the driving licence details over .
>
> Thanks to all of you for your time and valuable advise
>
--- End Quote ---
Probably a wise move.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 2
DIR Previous Page