DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: News / Press Articles
*****************************************************
#Post#: 95659--------------------------------------------------
That Kingston box junction
By: stamfordman Date: October 26, 2025, 1:53 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Britain’s most lucrative yellow box junction: £450k in eight
months
HTML https://archive.is/pAzbj
#Post#: 101097--------------------------------------------------
Re: That Kingston box junction
By: Hippocrates Date: December 5, 2025, 5:20 am
---------------------------------------------------------
In did an interview to be published in the Kingston Courier
imminently.
#Post#: 102688--------------------------------------------------
Re: That Kingston box junction
By: Hippocrates Date: December 16, 2025, 11:54 am
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://kingstoncourier.co.uk/britains-most-lucrative-yellow-box-junction-breaks-regulations-says-expert/
#Post#: 105578--------------------------------------------------
Re: That Kingston box junction
By: Hippocrates Date: January 12, 2026, 1:48 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
@stamfordman
Meeting Thursday 22nd January at Richard Challoner School, New
Malden. 7.30 p.m.
HTML https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/7OJ7eTQ_xl.jpg
Petition: www.king.org.uk/new-malden/yellow-box
#Post#: 105873--------------------------------------------------
Re: That Kingston box junction
By: astralite Date: January 14, 2026, 9:10 am
---------------------------------------------------------
NB its not 'king.org' It is 'kirg.org'
[left]To sign the petition go to:[/left]
HTML https://kirg.org.uk/new-malden/yellow-box
#Post#: 105989--------------------------------------------------
Re: That Kingston box junction
By: tincombe Date: January 15, 2026, 6:00 am
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://moderngov.kingston.gov.uk/documents/g10266/Public%20reports%20pack%20Thursday%2022-Jan-2026%2019.00%20New%20and%20Old%20Malden%20Neighbourhood%20Committee.pdf?T=10
As I understand it, the meeting is a Special Meeting and is at
7pm, not 7.30 which is the regular meeting. According to the
Officer's Report, it's been convened pursuant to a request by 3
Members of the Committee, not because of a petition as such,
although the members may have been prompted by one.
I think the report is poor (unless it's been written with an
intended objective, in which case it's as comprehensive as
needed). In as much as compliance is concerned, it states
clearly that both YBJs comply with TSRGD. I cannot find any
reference to adjudicators' specific determinations regarding the
YBJs, neither is this addressed under Legal Implications.
#Post#: 105990--------------------------------------------------
Re: That Kingston box junction
By: Hippocrates Date: January 15, 2026, 6:01 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=15]astralite[/member] Specsavers for me! Thanks.
#Post#: 105996--------------------------------------------------
Re: That Kingston box junction
By: Hippocrates Date: January 15, 2026, 6:35 am
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://radiojackie.com/scrap-the-trap/
Radio Jackie link But now at 7 p.m.
#Post#: 105997--------------------------------------------------
Re: That Kingston box junction
By: Hippocrates Date: January 15, 2026, 6:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Hippocrates link=topic=8545.msg105578#msg105578
date=1768247303]
[member=2249]stamfordman[/member]
Meeting Thursday 22nd January at Richard Challoner School, New
Malden. 7.30 p.m.
HTML https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/7OJ7eTQ_xl.jpg
[s]Petition: www.king.org.uk/new-malden/yellow-box[/s]
[/quote]
www.kirg.org.uk/new-malden/yellow-box
Apologies.
#Post#: 106174--------------------------------------------------
Re: That Kingston box junction
By: Hippocrates Date: January 16, 2026, 8:05 am
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/rKbbI8T_xl.png
I am Phillip Morgan, author of this document. I am a
representative for over 10 years at the London Tribunals
(formerly PATAS) and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. In 2012 I
exposed errors on the council’s bus lane tickets in the London
Evening Standard. I am responsible for all 34 London
authorities to have the correct certification for their bus lane
cameras since 2023 – a requirement which this council denied and
resulted in a costs decision against them. I have won 3 cases at
this box junction, one with costs. So, I am well-qualified to
comment on this junction - wherever that is!
• The above plan is adduced at Tribunal hearings. It does not
show the redacted part of the junction with Westbury Road, which
modification the council admits. They have no data regarding the
provision of the said plan to the Tribunal.
• There are four Kingston Roads in Kingston, and appeals have
been won on this point. So, the use of just “Kingston Road”
clearly is a problem for the motorist and the council in terms
of the publication of its exact figures, the latter which it
also admits.
• Any figures produced concerning appeals allowed and refused
are open to elastic interpretation as they are essentially
one-dimensional. Around 5 million PCNs are issued by the 34
authorities and only 1% of people fight their tickets. Many of
those appeals would have been allowed with proper
representation. Most people just part with their money without
appealing. It is in my judgement wholly unreasonable for a
Council to issue penalty charge notices in ignorance of ,or
disregard for, the legal provisions. I find that the strict
criteria necessary for an order for costs to be made are
satisfied . This is not the first case I have encountered where
this Council appears to pay no regard to, or has completely
misunderstood, the applicable law in box junction cases
(Adjudicator Edward Houghton Case No: 225019743A)
• Although less prescriptive than the previous Traffic Signs
Regulations and General Directions 2002, as there are no kerb
requirements, the cctv images produced show that in this case
the marking appears to extend well beyond the junction.
(Adjudicator Henry Michael Greenslade Case No: 2250256969) This
box junction is not marked at the junction of two roads in
accordance with the TSRGD 2016, it being marked both in advance
of, and beyond, the junction. (Adjudicator Sean Stanton-Dunne
Case No: 2250346289)
In simple terms, as Adjudicator Philippa Alderson said in Case
No: 2250036623: A box junction must be located at a junction
between two or more roads. Its purpose is to ensure that
vehicles have unrestricted access at the junction and that
traffic flow is not impeded. A box junction should not extend
significantly beyond the junction as it would serve no useful
purpose and would not achieve its objective, although there is
an element of flexibility. If a box junction extends
significantly beyond the junction, then it may be that no
contravention has taken place if a vehicle stops in that section
of junction which extends significantly past the junction.
I oppose the continued enforcement of either box junction
without drastic root to branch review.
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page