DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 75074--------------------------------------------------
Greenwich, Code 31 entering a box junction, Eltham High St SE9,
Eltham Fire Station
DIR By: dad-taxi
Date: June 6, 2025, 5:29 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Last week, I ended up stopping in a yellow box junction outside
the Eltham fire station :( , while safely braking to avoid a
tailgating delivery driver. I am wondering if there is a chance
of appealing and getting this revoked
Here is the PCN copy
HTML https://imgur.com/a/k5up2QH
This is the video provided by the council which does show that
the 2 wheeler was tailgating me (I am the red car), and when
they changed lanes I was able to stop safely.
HTML https://imgur.com/a/tfLxXNd
The evidence photos provided by them
HTML https://imgur.com/a/kMhQzzk
Here is the Google street view
Google street view location
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/J1CN16N8PhQ66AMP6
Any help and knowledge appreciated on even a "sorry mate,
nothing you can do, just pay up" will be received with humility.
Cheers,
dadtaxi
#Post#: 75125--------------------------------------------------
Re: Greenwich, Code 31 entering a box junction, Eltham High St
SE9, Eltham Fire Station
DIR By: Pastmybest
Date: June 6, 2025, 8:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You have an argument that you were being tailgated by the
motorbike so stopped in the box in order to avoid an accident.
Further the box is to long and the part you stopped in is not in
an area authorized for box markings
#Post#: 75140--------------------------------------------------
Re: Greenwich, Code 31 entering a box junction, Eltham High St
SE9, Eltham Fire Station
DIR By: MrChips
Date: June 6, 2025, 9:34 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Agreed.
Further, the box is long and you stop at the near end many
metres away from the stationary car at the exit. As such, the
video doesn't necessarily prove a contravention as instead of
stopping you could have crawled through at walking pace (take
the couple walking along the pavement on your side of the road
as a reference) and not reached the vehicle on the other side
before the footage stops.
The contravention only occurs if you have to stop due to the
presence of stationary vehicles, not if you stop in a situation
when you didn't necessarily have to.
Perhaps a combination of these two arguments will be enough to
tip this in your favour on balance of probabilities.
#Post#: 75159--------------------------------------------------
Re: Greenwich, Code 31 entering a box junction, Eltham High St
SE9, Eltham Fire Station
DIR By: dad-taxi
Date: June 6, 2025, 10:40 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Pastmybest link ---
>
> You have an argument that you were being tailgated by the
motorbike so stopped in the box in order to avoid an accident.
Further the box is to long and the part you stopped in is not in
an area authorized for box markings
>
--- End Quote ---
--- Quote from: MrChips link ---
>
> Agreed.
>
> Further, the box is long and you stop at the near end many
metres away from the stationary car at the exit. As such, the
video doesn't necessarily prove a contravention as instead of
stopping you could have crawled through at walking pace (take
the couple walking along the pavement on your side of the road
as a reference) and not reached the vehicle on the other side
before the footage stops.
>
> The contravention only occurs if you have to stop due to the
presence of stationary vehicles, not if you stop in a situation
when you didn't necessarily have to.
>
> Perhaps a combination of these two arguments will be enough to
tip this in your favour on balance of probabilities.
>
--- End Quote ---
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you both. When I check options to challenge, I see one
possible option (I have marked with a red dot in this image)
HTML https://imgur.com/9LoOnS6
HTML https://imgur.com/9LoOnS6
There is a "None of the above" also available if this doesn't
look suitable.
---------------------------------------------------------
I did look up the helpful Google sheets excel provided for a
sample text for the appeal, but could not find anything
suitable. So I did what most people do these days and asked AI.
I sense that this would likely not be the language the experts
in this forum will approve, but as a starter for 10, this is
what Google Gemini says
---------------------------------------------------------
Dear Royal Borough of Greenwich Enforcement Team,
I am writing to formally challenge Penalty Charge Notice [Your
PCN Number] issued on [Date of PCN] for contravention 31J -
"Entering and stopping in a box junction when prohibited," at
[Location of Box Junction, as stated on PCN].
Having reviewed the video evidence provided, I contend that no
contravention occurred for the following reasons:
Safety and Unavoidable Circumstances due to Tailgating:
As is clearly visible in the provided video evidence, my vehicle
was being severely tailgated by a motorbike as I approached the
box junction. This situation presented a significant safety
hazard, compelling me to proceed into the box junction at a
speed that would prevent a rear-end collision, rather than
making an abrupt stop before the box. To have stopped suddenly,
purely to avoid entering the box, would have put myself and
other road users, particularly the motorbike, at serious risk of
an accident. The Highway Code implicitly encourages drivers to
avoid creating hazards, and my actions were a direct result of
prioritizing road safety under duress.
Disproportionate Box Junction Length and Location of Stop:
The box junction in question at [Location] is disproportionately
long. As the video evidence demonstrates, I stopped at the near
end of the box, many metres away from the stationary vehicle at
the exit. The segment of the box junction where my vehicle came
to a stop is not in an area that typically requires box markings
to prevent obstruction of cross-traffic. Its excessive length
means that my brief stop did not, in fact, impede any
cross-traffic or cause the congestion that box junctions are
designed to prevent. This raises questions about the compliance
of the box junction's design with regulatory guidelines, where
markings should only cover the area necessary to protect cross
movements.
Nature of the Contravention and Implied Movement:
The contravention code 31J specifies "entering and stopping in a
box junction when prohibited." My argument is that the evidence
does not definitively prove a 'prohibited stop'. Given the
significant distance between my vehicle and the stationary car
at the exit, instead of a complete stop, I could have very
easily been "crawling" through the box junction at a walking
pace, which is often indistinguishable from a brief stop in
video footage and is permissible if one is still intending to
clear the box. The video's conclusion does not necessarily prove
that I would have remained stationary or that I would have
reached the stationary vehicle before moving out of the box. The
purpose of a box junction is to prevent obstruction, and my
position did not constitute an obstruction to any clear traffic
flow or entry/exit movements.
I kindly request that you consider these points in light of the
video evidence and cancel this Penalty Charge Notice. I am
confident that a thorough review will demonstrate that my
actions were either unavoidable due to immediate safety concerns
or did not constitute an actual contravention of the box
junction rules, especially considering the specific
circumstances and the design of the junction.
I look forward to your prompt response.
#Post#: 75808--------------------------------------------------
Re: Greenwich, Code 31 entering a box junction, Eltham High St
SE9, Eltham Fire Station
DIR By: dad-taxi
Date: June 10, 2025, 10:09 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Got some further support from theyellowboxguru, and here is the
new AI generated text
---------------------------------------------------------
Having meticulously reviewed the video evidence provided, and
considering the circumstances, I contend that no contravention
occurred, or alternatively, that any alleged contravention was
unavoidable and therefore should be cancelled. My grounds for
appeal are as follows:
Safety and Unavoidable Circumstances due to Severe Tailgating:
As is clearly visible in the provided video evidence, my vehicle
was being severely tailgated by a motorbike as I approached the
yellow box junction. This dangerous proximity left me with no
safe option to stop prior to entering the yellow box. Had I
attempted an abrupt stop to avoid the box, a rear-end collision
with the tailgating motorbike would have been highly probable,
posing a significant risk to myself, the motorcyclist, and other
road users. My primary concern was road safety, and my action to
proceed was a direct response to avoiding an immediate accident.
As soon as it was safe to do so, I brought my vehicle to a halt.
The Highway Code implicitly encourages drivers to avoid creating
hazards, and my actions were a direct consequence of an unsafe
situation created by another road user.
Disproportionate Box Junction Length and Irrelevant Stop
Location:
The yellow box marking at [Exact Location] is excessively long
and extends significantly beyond what would typically be
considered the functional area of a box junction. As
demonstrated in your video evidence, my vehicle came to a stop
at the near end of this extended box, specifically in the
segment that extends beyond the visible fire station access.
This particular portion of the yellow box is not in an area that
facilitates any cross-traffic or directly impacts the flow of
vehicles exiting or entering a primary junction. My brief stop
in this specific segment did not, in fact, cause any obstruction
to cross-traffic or impede the normal flow of vehicles in any
meaningful way, which is the sole purpose of box junction
markings. The presence of markings in this extended area raises
questions about the box junction's compliance with regulatory
guidelines, where markings should only cover the area necessary
to prevent obstruction at a genuine junction.
Nature of the Contravention and Implied Movement:
The contravention code 31J specifies "entering and stopping in a
box junction when prohibited." My argument is that the evidence
provided does not definitively prove a 'prohibited stop' within
the meaning of the regulations. Given the significant distance
between my vehicle and the stationary car at the exit, it is
entirely plausible that, instead of a complete stop, I was
merely "crawling" through the box junction at an extremely slow,
walking pace. Such slow movement is often visually
indistinguishable from a brief stop in video footage, and is
permissible if one is still actively intending to clear the box.
Crucially, the video's conclusion does not demonstrate that my
vehicle would have remained stationary, nor does it prove that I
would have reached the stationary vehicle before moving clear of
the box. The fundamental purpose of a box junction is to prevent
obstruction; in my position, no actual obstruction to any clear
traffic flow or entry/exit movements occurred.
Procedural Impropriety – Misleading Payment Instructions:
I also wish to highlight a procedural impropriety in the Penalty
Charge Notice itself. The PCN states that I have "28 days from
the date of service" to pay the penalty charge before it
increases. However, in other sections, it refers to timeframes
in relation to the "date of notice." This inconsistency is
confusing and misleading. A PCN must be clear and unambiguous
regarding payment terms and deadlines. The discrepancy between
"date of service" and "date of notice" introduces an
unacceptable level of uncertainty regarding the precise deadline
for payment at the discounted rate and when the full charge
becomes payable. This ambiguity prejudices my ability to
understand my rights and obligations fully, and therefore
constitutes a procedural impropriety, rendering the PCN invalid.
In conclusion, I respectfully request that you consider the
compelling safety reasons for my unavoidable entry into the box,
the irrelevant and disproportionate location of my stop within
an excessively long box junction, the lack of definitive proof
of a prohibited stop given the context of slow movement, and the
procedural error present on the PCN itself.
I trust that a thorough and fair review of the evidence and
these points will lead to the cancellation of Penalty Charge
Notice [Your PCN Number].
I look forward to your prompt response.
#Post#: 76044--------------------------------------------------
Re: Greenwich, Code 31 entering a box junction, Eltham High St
SE9, Eltham Fire Station
DIR By: dad-taxi
Date: June 11, 2025, 11:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=1]cp8759[/member], be grateful if you can help review
this/help redraft so I could challenge my PCN.
#Post#: 76049--------------------------------------------------
Re: Greenwich, Code 31 entering a box junction, Eltham High St
SE9, Eltham Fire Station
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: June 11, 2025, 11:27 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=5738]dad-taxi[/member] that AI generate nonsense is, by
and large, nonsense. Unfortunately my other commitments prevent
me from looking into this for you.
#Post#: 76051--------------------------------------------------
Re: Greenwich, Code 31 entering a box junction, Eltham High St
SE9, Eltham Fire Station
DIR By: Pastmybest
Date: June 11, 2025, 11:38 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Throw all that rubbish in the bin. most is irrelevant and what
isn't is not to the point.
I was approaching the YBJ at xxxxxxxxxxxx at an appropriate
speed with a good distance between my self and vehicles in
front. From my driving position I could see that there would be
room for me to cross the box and clear it. Unfortunately the two
cars immediately in front of me stopped leaving and unusually
large gap thus meaning i would not clear the box. I started to
brake to stop before the box markings but due to a motorcycle
tailgating me i had to reduce my braking to avoid an
accident.This being the only reason i encroached into the marked
area.
Research shows that a box in this situation may be marked
outside the entrance to a fire station, this box is far to long
and as such is not placed in a prescribed place and as such
should not be there and no contravention can occur the PCN
should now be cancelled at this earliest opportunity
Do not overdo it for representations to the council they will
reject anything all you need do is state the grounds
#Post#: 76052--------------------------------------------------
Re: Greenwich, Code 31 entering a box junction, Eltham High St
SE9, Eltham Fire Station
DIR By: dad-taxi
Date: June 11, 2025, 11:40 am
---------------------------------------------------------
thank you [member=1]cp8759[/member] and
[member=156]Pastmybest[/member]. I will just throw the AI text
in the bin as suggested and I just write my to the point
argument.
will post back if something changes.
Cheers
#Post#: 76059--------------------------------------------------
Re: Greenwich, Code 31 entering a box junction, Eltham High St
SE9, Eltham Fire Station
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: June 11, 2025, 12:30 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Why not back to basics:
IMO, as far as is relevant:
The regulations provide the following:
Box junctions
11.—(1) Subject to sub-paragraphs (2), (3) and (4), the yellow
criss-cross marking provided for at item 25 of the sign table in
Part 6 conveys the prohibition 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.
In this case the yellow markings are placed 'on the length of
road adjacent to the vehicular entrance to the premises of a
fire, police or ambulance station
Therefore paragraph 11(7) of Part 6 of Schedule 9 applies:
(7) A reference in this paragraph (however expressed) to a
vehicle which is stationary or stops within a box junction
includes a vehicle which is stationary whilst part of it is
within the box junction.
A 'box junction' is a defined term, as above, it is not the
extent of yellow markings on the carriageway unless these have
been placed where permitted.
In my case, the 'vehicle entrance' extends between the 2 points
of the crossover where the carriageway is tangential to the
corners. It therefore follows that the extent of the 'box
junction' is that area whose shorter sides are at right-angles
to these points and whose length is that distance between. This
can be seen clearly at the lower corner.
However, equally clearly the yellow markings extend beyond this
point at the upper corner and as clearly my car was not 'stopped
within the permitted box junction although I accept that it was
stopped on the yellow lines.
The council has no power to place yellow markings willy-nilly
but must comply with the regulations. Similarly, a penalty is
not owing because no part of my car was within the area
restricted by those regulations.
The PCN must be cancelled.
OP, IMO I think your tail-gating is a no-hoper for 2 reasons:
1. It's not the motorcycle which caused you to stop, it was the
lack of exit space for the right-turn only lane;
2. It's not a defence anyway whatever we might think. Frankly,
if moving into a bus lane and crossing a traffic light white
line to move for emergency services vehicles are not defences to
those respective contraventions, and they're not, then yours
certainly isn't.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 4
DIR Next Page