DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 7020--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL YBJ Code 31 Battersea bridge Rd/ Battersea Church Rd
DIR By: Chaseman
Date: October 8, 2023, 12:19 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
You might find this PATAS (now London Tribunals) appeal useful.
Adjudicator Carl Teper allowed the appeal on a YBJ offence in
large part because the video did not show the entire driving of
the car into and out of the YBJ. He said "I find this to be a
serious omission". I understand in your case the CCTV does not
show you entering the YBJ.
HTML https://londontribunals.org.uk/ords/pwslive/f?p=14952:70::INITIALISE::70:P70_CAS_REFNO,P70_PCN_REFNO,P70_RETURN_PAGE,P70_AST_CODE:1088951,1136344,60,APPEAL&cs=3BaWuJ7V72DRQ0gtNejEAH8C5_7BpCFbZLXv5Q1OvC-BdYMI2z7B4xFJw4X6WAPFNzhyU1y7XlvLuRKlDGRaMGQ
The case reference is 2130491073
#Post#: 7047--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL YBJ Code 31 Battersea bridge Rd/ Battersea Church Rd
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: October 8, 2023, 5:28 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Chaseman linking to tribunal decisions like that doesn't work,
so I've put a working link here
HTML https://drive.google.com/uc?id=1gMCupjZs84scoevUsnhf3yqiUnbarTC5.
YBJnoMore I suggest you post a draft representation based on
what's been said above and we'll tidy it up for you.
#Post#: 7066--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL YBJ Code 31 Battersea bridge Rd/ Battersea Church Rd
DIR By: Chaseman
Date: October 9, 2023, 4:48 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Many thanks cp, I was slightly unsure whether the link would
work and hence quoted the case ref. Hope it helps OP.
#Post#: 7075--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL YBJ Code 31 Battersea bridge Rd/ Battersea Church Rd
DIR By: YBJnoMore
Date: October 9, 2023, 8:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Here is my draft, I have included all points that are not
subjective. Thanks Again everyone! :)
Dear Sir/Madam
Ref: PCN Number: GX09900630
My grounds of my appeal are that:
The contravention alleged by the Authority on the Penalty Charge
Notice did not occur.
1. Paragraph 7(1) of Part II of Schedule 19 to the Traffic Signs
Regulations and General Directions 2002 provides
that no person shall cause a vehicle to enter a box junction so
that the vehicle has to stop within the box junction
due to the presence of stationary vehicle. The councils evidence
does not show my vehicle entering the Yellow Box Junction. And
the offence is completed at entry of the YBJ which is not shown.
London Tribunal case 2130491073, 2160264616, 2230099245
2. The top left hand corner of the box does not meet the kerb
line. In the absence of any special authorisation that this box
is compliant with either diagram 1043 or 1044 of The Traffic
Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002. Therefor this PCN
is unenforceable. London Tribunal case: 2110069641, 2110138201
3. The PCN states I committed the offence at 17:26 whereas
actually it must have been no later than 17:25, But this cannot
be verified due to my entry not being on the CCTV.
4. The PCN states contravention code 31. However this is
captured on CCTV so the code should be 31J.
#Post#: 7081--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL YBJ Code 31 Battersea bridge Rd/ Battersea Church Rd
DIR By: YBJnoMore
Date: October 9, 2023, 9:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I got my FOI Back. And they have done it for the wrong junction!
And the FOI website is down it seems. I will post it here
anyways, if anyone knows the junction it may be use for someone
else haha.
Our ref: FOI-2141-2324/GH
Thank you for your request received by Transport for London
(TfL) on 18 September 2023 asking for information about the
yellow box Junction Battersea Bridge/ Battersea Church Road.
Your request has been considered under the requirements of the
Freedom of Information Act 2000 and our information access
policy. I can confirm that we do hold the information you
require.
1. Does this yellow box junction have an exemption from the
Secretary of State for Transport, for the yellow box not to
touch the kerb.
This yellow box junction (YBJ) has been authorised for use by
the Department for Transport (DfT) as per The Traffic, Signs,
Regulations and General Directions (TSRGD) 2016. The purpose of
yellow box junctions are to keep traffic flowing and we can
confirm that this box junction is fully compliant with the TSRGD
2016.
2. Do you have a report detailing the visibility of the YBJ,
considering the street furniture and also how the YBJ is raised
from surrounding roads.
The YBJ is marked on the road according to the requirements of
TSRGD 2016.
3. Can your provide a list of all the Contravention codes for
PCNs and one’s issued using different evidence.
The contravention code for a YBJ contravention is 31
4. Was denied.
5. Can you provide most recent pictures showing the layout of
the junction.
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 7087--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL YBJ Code 31 Battersea bridge Rd/ Battersea Church Rd
DIR By: MrChips
Date: October 9, 2023, 11:12 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: YBJnoMore link ---
>
> Here is my draft, I have included all points that are not
subjective. Thanks Again everyone! :)
>
>
> Dear Sir/Madam
> Ref: PCN Number: GX09900630
>
> My grounds of my appeal are that:
> The contravention alleged by the Authority on the Penalty
Charge Notice did not occur.
>
> 1. Paragraph 7(1) of Part II of Schedule 19 to the Traffic
Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 provides
> that no person shall cause a vehicle to enter a box junction
so that the vehicle has to stop within the box junction
> due to the presence of stationary vehicle. The councils
evidence does not show my vehicle entering the Yellow Box
Junction. And the offence is completed at entry of the YBJ which
is not shown. London Tribunal case 2130491073, 2160264616,
2230099245
>
> 2. The top left hand corner of the box does not meet the kerb
line. In the absence of any special authorisation that this box
is compliant with either diagram 1043 or 1044 of The Traffic
Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002. Therefor this PCN
is unenforceable. London Tribunal case: 2110069641, 2110138201
>
> 3. The PCN states I committed the offence at 17:26 whereas
actually it must have been no later than 17:25, But this cannot
be verified due to my entry not being on the CCTV.
>
> 4. The PCN states contravention code 31. However this is
captured on CCTV so the code should be 31J.
>
--- End Quote ---
The TSRGD 2002 has been updated by the TSRGD 2016 which, as I
understand, has given more wiggle room around the placing of the
box junction markings. As such, I'd be inclined to remove point
2, for fear of giving an adjudicator the impression you are
fishing and subconsciously turning them against your other
arguments which (while they have merit) are also subjective and
require the adjudicator to be on your side to prevail. I note
the two cases cited are from 2011 which is before the revised
regulations came into force.
I also think the 31 vs 31J code argument is weak so have
suggested removing (but you can reinstate if others think it's a
potential winner)
Suggested redraft (wait for other comments)
Ref: PCN Number: GX09900630
I contend that the contravention alleged by the Authority on the
Penalty Charge Notice did not occur. My representations are as
follows:
1. Under the relevant box junction regulations no person shall
cause a vehicle to enter a box junction so that the vehicle has
to stop within the box junction
due to the presence of stationary vehicles. I have reviewed
TFL's video evidence and it does not show the moment my vehicle
entered the box junction. There are numerous tribunal decisions
which confirm it is a requirement for the video evidence to show
the moment of entry into the box (including a key case on the
London Tribunals website). Further London Tribunal cases
setting out this principle are 2130491073, 2160264616,
2230099245.
2. The PCN is required to state the grounds on which a penalty
charge is payable. To this end the PCN states the time the
alleged offence was committed as 17:26. Under the relevant box
junction regulations, the offence is committed at the point of
entry into the box (the actual offence is causing a vehicle to
enter the box if it subsequently has to stop within the box
junction due to the presence of stationary vehicles). As set
out in my first point, the video footage does now show my
vehicle entering the box and so it is not possible to know the
time the alleged offence occurred. Taking the time stamp on
TFL's own footage at face value all one can deduce is that the
vehicle entered the box junction no later than 17:25 as it can
already be seen within the box junction at this time. As such
the grounds stated on the PCN are shown to be incorrect by TFL's
own evidence and the contravention as stated on the PCN clearly
did not occur.
#Post#: 7091--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL YBJ Code 31 Battersea bridge Rd/ Battersea Church Rd
DIR By: YBJnoMore
Date: October 9, 2023, 12:21 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks MrChips, I was mindful about about seemingly in their
eyes I am throwing anything at the appeal to hope something is
relevant.
I was reading more about the 31vs 31J and even saw an
Adjudicator say it is the wrong code but it is minor and does
not change the result. So yeah think that is probably a no go (I
have tried finding it again to link but lost it sorry)
My mistake for using the outdated regs. I have been studying the
new ones and they have greatly relaxed the code for the YBJ like
you say. Although touching the Kerbs does not affect the shape I
think this is where they might be able to argue a red route is
allowed. Under chapter 5 8.4.1 ". It might also be appropriate
for parts of the boundary line to be placed adjacent to the kerb
at a road junction" I am not the best at understanding
legislation but does that also look like touching the kerb is
not required.
#Post#: 7140--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL YBJ Code 31 Battersea bridge Rd/ Battersea Church Rd
DIR By: YBJnoMore
Date: October 10, 2023, 4:24 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Does anyone have anything further to add before submitting the
appeal tomorrow?. So far I am just going to only use the two
point MrChips recommends.
Thanks :)
#Post#: 7246--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL YBJ Code 31 Battersea bridge Rd/ Battersea Church Rd
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: October 11, 2023, 4:37 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I would go with MrChips's draft.
#Post#: 16614--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL YBJ Code 31 Battersea bridge Rd/ Battersea Church Rd
DIR By: YBJnoMore
Date: March 1, 2024, 10:08 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Just wish to update this and the council accepted my appeal! I
am unsure if it was because of the time to process the appeal or
the grounds either thanks everyone! Unfortunately I checked this
because I got one again :(
11 January 2024Cancelled
The Penalty Charge Notice has been cancelled.
11 January 2024Representation Accepted
TfL has accepted a representation received for this PCN.
12 October 2023Representation submitted Under review
N/A
11 October 2023Email dispatched to: ******@gmail.com Subj
Representation receipted
N/A
11 October 2023On Hold: SUS26 - Representation Received
N/A
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 3
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page