DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 93962--------------------------------------------------
Re: YBJ in walthamstow - Giving way to on coming traffic
DIR By: Innocentman
Date: October 13, 2025, 7:53 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Gotta say though that it really does look in the video like the
offending car slowed dramatically, almost to a complete stop,
before the truck turned in front of him.
#Post#: 93965--------------------------------------------------
Re: YBJ in walthamstow - Giving way to on coming traffic
DIR By: MrChips
Date: October 14, 2025, 1:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
That may be the case but it doesn't constitute a box junction
offence. You can stop in there whenever you like, so long as
your exit is free from stationary traffic.
#Post#: 93993--------------------------------------------------
Re: YBJ in walthamstow - Giving way to on coming traffic
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: October 14, 2025, 5:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
OP, the law as regards the definition of the restriction imposed
by a YBJ:
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.
Para. 11 Part 7 of Schedule 9 to the Traffic Signs etc. Regs
refers:
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/9
We don't need to worry about the exceptions, as far as this case
is concerned the following apply:
Did the driver CAUSE their car to enter the YBJ? Of course, they
deliberately drove into it;
Did the vehicle HAVE TO STOP due to the presence of stationary
traffic? Of course not. Although the artic was stationary, the
driver in this case did not HAVE to stop, they CHOSE to stop.
Frankly they could choose to stop for any number of reasons,
including bloody mindedness, but this would not be a
contravention as regards the YBJ.
The definition is clear, there are no judgments or body of
adjudication decisions to the contrary so take the stupid
b******s to adjudication and ask for costs.
Step 1 - register the appeal.
#Post#: 94018--------------------------------------------------
Re: YBJ in walthamstow - Giving way to on coming traffic
DIR By: Pastmybest
Date: October 14, 2025, 8:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
see this relevant finding by the tribunal
2160310225
I have heard the appellant in person who I find an honest and
credible witness. The Authority did not appear and was not
represented.
The Authority has produced the details of a link to their
website on which I have viewed CCTV footage. The footage shows
that the exit lane of the box junction was clear when the
appellant’s vehicle entered it. Further, it shows that the
vehicle stopped only briefly in the box junction when there was
sufficient space to move forward. The vehicle was not forced to
stop in the box because of stationary traffic.
I find as fact that the exit lane was clear when the vehicle in
question entered the box junction. I find as fact that the
vehicle was not forced to stop because of stationary traffic.
The components for the contravention have not been met. I am not
satisfied that the contravention occurred.
I allow the appeal.
#Post#: 94033--------------------------------------------------
Re: YBJ in walthamstow - Giving way to on coming traffic
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: October 14, 2025, 9:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: MrChips link ---
>
> That may be the case but it doesn't constitute a box junction
offence. You can stop in there whenever you like, so long as
your exit is free from stationary traffic.
>
--- End Quote ---
I don't think they know what forthwith means in Walthamstow.
#Post#: 94050--------------------------------------------------
Re: YBJ in walthamstow - Giving way to on coming traffic
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: October 14, 2025, 10:45 am
---------------------------------------------------------
:)
But to just modify the previous post and identify the laziness
of adjudicators, the law makes no reference to where stationary
traffic must be, IMO this business of always referencing
stopping in the context of whether traffic is stationary outside
the box and an exit is clear is misleading.
IMO, while you might stop inside the box to have a fag or take a
telephone call or whatever while your exit is clear without
contravening the YBJ restriction, the same would not apply to
anyone who entered the box after you and stopped behind you
because that's not permitted: their exit is not clear.
'Stationary vehicles' applies equally inside the box as outside,
subject to the specified exception, which of course exists for
the very situation I've described above.
#Post#: 94068--------------------------------------------------
Re: YBJ in walthamstow - Giving way to on coming traffic
DIR By: mickR
Date: October 14, 2025, 12:23 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Hippocrates link ---
>
> [quote author=MrChips link=topic=8367.msg93965#msg93965
date=1760423449]
> That may be the case but it doesn't constitute a box junction
offence. You can stop in there whenever you like, so long as
your exit is free from stationary traffic.
>
--- End Quote ---
I don't think they know what forthwith means in Walthamstow.
[/quote]
they will probably count the number of times the op wrote "with"
and come up with "secondwith"
#Post#: 94261--------------------------------------------------
Re: YBJ in walthamstow - Giving way to on coming traffic
DIR By: Innocentman
Date: October 15, 2025, 8:00 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
He stopped, it would appear because the truck turned in front of
him.
But when he entered the box at about 08:35:24, his exit was not
clear:
HTML https://i.postimg.cc/PqVDdTx7/image-2025-10-16-010046055.png
He was anticipating it would be, but I'm wondering if what he
could see from the driver's seat made him worry, for a brief
moment, that it might not be when he got there, and slowed a
little so that he wouldn't end up being forced to stop by
vehicles blocking his exit. And when he slowed the truck driver
took his chance.
Neither was the exit clear for the silver van at 08:35:19 or the
black one a couple of seconds after.
Now - I've always been led to believe that if the HC says
"MUST", it's reflecting an actual law, but in this case it is
not.
The HC says "You MUST NOT enter the box until your exit road or
lane is clear". But the law doesn't - it says "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."
So why does the HC say "MUST NOT"? I wonder if the two van
drivers have also been done?
I always thought it was a case re the exit being clear of
"should not enter on the grounds that you must not stop", but
hands up - who hasn't at some time entered a YBJ anticipating
that they'd make it across, and with some of those times had a
brief don't-stop-don't-stop-don't-stop worry about the traffic
in front?
And that rejection is a mess. It quotes the HC "MUST NOT" and
in the next para says "should not".
#Post#: 94269--------------------------------------------------
Re: YBJ in walthamstow - Giving way to on coming traffic
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: October 16, 2025, 3:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
OP, you entered the box as shown in the video. You observed the
large vehicle ahead indicating their intention to turn right. As
can be seen, they're somewhat larger than you and colliding with
them was not an option. You therefore stopped solely to allow
this vehicle to cross ahead of you. This was your prerogative.
Stopping had nothing whatsoever to do with the yellow box, you
treat other drivers with the same consideration whatever the
circumstances and road layout and feel aggrieved when the same
courtesy is not extended to you.
As you did not stop 'due to the presence of stationary vehicles
ahead' then the contravention did not occur. It is not a
contravention simply to stop.
The authority was over-zealous in issuing the PCN simply because
you stopped within the YBJ and it must be cancelled if the law
as it relates to this contravention is applied correctly, not to
mention the council's duty to act fairly.
Is my take.
They're judges in their own cause and given that they issued the
PCN in the first place - after consideration of the self-evident
facts HA HA - then what do you think they'll do in response to
your reps??
I've set out what I believe would form the basis of any appeal,
should it get that far.
IMO, whether your exit was clear when you entered is NOT
something about which too much time should be spent. You were in
the driver's seat, not sitting atop a pole. Your view is always
the car ahead. You have NO certainty that your exit would be
clear in moving traffic without leaving at least one car's space
beyond the box. In fact, given that there's the length of the
YBJ to consider, you'd need to be either 6+ car lengths behind
at all times - there are no pre-warnings for these markings- or
be prepared to STOP in moving traffic as soon as the car ahead
touches YBJ markings. There are decisions, and I think
judgments, on the effect this would have on traffic. Poring over
'what ifs' and 'after the event' matters are not options
available to a driver in real time.
I would take this all the way to adjudication if necessary, but
it's your money.
#Post#: 94276--------------------------------------------------
Re: YBJ in walthamstow - Giving way to on coming traffic
DIR By: zeezee
Date: October 16, 2025, 4:40 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you all for your responses - I feel the same way in him
going all the way (to adj - which is the current stage) & so i
will relay that info to him in a structured way so that he
understands.
In the meantime i will get him to put the appeal in - Is it the
same process where you can submit the appeal & come back to it
at later date (within the timelines) with the attachment
(compiled word document - appeal letter)?
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 4
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page