38JL Failing to comply with a sign indicating that vehicular traffic must pass to the specified side of the sign |
38JL Failing to comply with a sign indicating that vehicular traffic must pass to the specified side of the sign |
Tue, 20 Nov 2018 - 16:17
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 12 Joined: 20 Nov 2018 Member No.: 101,040 |
Hey guys,
I received a PCN a couple of weeks ago and I have been chasing a reply up until today. I have been told that a letter has been sent out rejecting my appeal, which I am waiting to receive. I just wanted to check with people on here whether or not it is worth appealing further or to pay the £65 - potentially £130 in 2 weeks. I included alot of detail in my email to them and I feel as though I should have focused on the fact that the white van appears to be on yellow lines. I have attached a video of the contravention and copied the email I sent to them below: EMAIL: This email is in reference to the following: Vehicle registration number: PCN number: IZ10398002 Date of this Notice 24/10/2018 Date of contravention: 14/10/2018 I would like to appeal against the PCN and explain the reasoning behind my actions and hope that you will consider cancelling the penalty. This was my first time driving in Islington and I was being extra careful to avoid entering bus lanes and I was over-analysing the road whilst travelling at a slower speed than I normally would. I had not experienced this type of "width limiting" on a road before, so I approached with caution. I was even more cautious as it was dark and there were no other cars around, so I had to make sure I was navigating the roads correctly. I remembered the contravention after seeing the video footage online because it happened towards the end of a very long journey and it was the only eventful thing that occurred. I remember approaching the signs considering that it may be a bus lane of some sort, at the same time as wondering why I would be directed to the left when the lane was so narrow and there were parked cars immediately after. All of this thinking took place in a matter of seconds, even though I was travelling below the speed limit, I had to make an on the spot decision. As you can see on the video, I was initially in the correct lane and would most likely have remained there if I hadn't of noticed the white van parked up considerably close to the narrow lane. As soon as I could judge the distance I could see that there wasn't much room between the little island and the back of the van. I believe the white van was actually on the yellow lines, providing even less space than if it was in the designated parking spot (which appears to be too close as well). The middle lane is also very "normal" looking without any raised areas, paint etc, so without the experience of the area, it is pretty much impossible to know that this is completely out of bounds. To conclude, I didn't use the middle lane as a shortcut - I feel as though I was forced to and it was a very fair decision on my part due to the factors mentioned above. I did manage to make the journey without going in any bus lanes (as far as I am ware, maybe that letter will come tomorrow!) Please see the following still taken from the online video: I look forwarded to your response.
Attached File(s)
|
|
|
Advertisement |
Tue, 20 Nov 2018 - 16:17
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Tue, 20 Nov 2018 - 16:32
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,735 Joined: 22 Oct 2007 Member No.: 14,720 |
I received a PCN so press "report" and ask a mod to move your post to the correct forum. -------------------- |
|
|
Tue, 20 Nov 2018 - 16:33
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26 Joined: 6 Nov 2018 Member No.: 100,806 |
Having looked at the video, I find it hard to come out with any kind of defense for this, the white van is parked close but not so close as to cause obstruction, the road marking make it clear there is no "middle lane" and direct you to left of the island.
The signs were not confusing or obstructed in any way that I can see. I wont commit to saying you don't have a defense, as someone my have more knowledge than I do of contravening a keep left sign, but I will commit to saying I cant see a defense. |
|
|
Tue, 20 Nov 2018 - 16:36
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 12 Joined: 20 Nov 2018 Member No.: 101,040 |
peterguk - I have asked for it to be moved.
OUYSINEP - I appreciate the response. |
|
|
Tue, 20 Nov 2018 - 17:30
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
Well there's plenty of room so you won't get out of this on the contravention. A lot of Islington's poxy I mean proxy width restrictions are fairly tight but within limits.
It's Grange Grove? https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5466863,-0....6384!8i8192 Van was probably in bay: https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5465491,-0....6384!8i8192 Post the PCN as it may have faults. This post has been edited by stamfordman: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 - 17:48 |
|
|
Tue, 20 Nov 2018 - 18:06
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 12 Joined: 20 Nov 2018 Member No.: 101,040 |
Thanks for the reply stamfordman. I will check for the original PCN, but I am pretty sure it has been thrown away.
It looks like I will just have to have to pay. I think the least they could do is put "emergency vehicles only" on the central part as the only people who suffer are wagon drivers trying to shortcut down the road (which is the intended target) and confused drivers.. Thanks for the opinions all. |
|
|
Tue, 20 Nov 2018 - 18:20
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 20,919 Joined: 22 Apr 2012 Member No.: 54,455 |
Thanks for the reply stamfordman. I will check for the original PCN, but I am pretty sure it has been thrown away. It looks like I will just have to have to pay. I think the least they could do is put "emergency vehicles only" on the central part as the only people who suffer are wagon drivers trying to shortcut down the road (which is the intended target) and confused drivers.. Thanks for the opinions all. They have 100% discretion when deciding to issue a PCN. You do wonder why they issue PCNs to cars and bikes when the restriction is to stop large vehicles, (vans, HGVs etc) from proceeding down the road. The answer is it is all about generating cash, cash, cash. |
|
|
Tue, 20 Nov 2018 - 18:28
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 23,582 Joined: 12 Feb 2013 From: London Member No.: 59,924 |
I've said this before but I would like to see someone take on these proxy restrictions at a judicial level. In 2018, there are no shortage of technological methods of policing a width restriction - indeed an ANPR system linked to DVLA would do it.
Instead we have a ridiculous keep left contravention for vehicles that are allowed to proceed. |
|
|
Tue, 20 Nov 2018 - 20:52
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
I've said this before but I would like to see someone take on these proxy restrictions at a judicial level. In 2018, there are no shortage of technological methods of policing a width restriction - indeed an ANPR system linked to DVLA would do it. Inventive council employee: We could set up a camera to only issue PCNs to large vehicles that ignore the width restriction Council boss: How much would that cost? Inventive council employee: Maybe 50-100k Council boss: And what would the impact be on PCNs? Inventive council employee: Well we'd issue zero to cars and vans, so motorists would be happy Council boss: And how much PCN revenue is that going to cost us? Inventive council employee: Maybe 100k a year, for every year, in perpetuity Council boss: investment denied!! -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Wed, 21 Nov 2018 - 15:56
Post
#10
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 9 Joined: 19 Nov 2018 Member No.: 101,008 |
Apologies for using the same thread but this is fresh so I thought I would add to it. I was also caught out on Grange Grove a couple of weeks ago at 6:30 am in the dark and with very heavy rain. I ended up in Grange Grove having been diverted from the main road (St Paul’s Road) as I headed north to Highbury Corner because of roadworks. Also being unfamiliar with the area I have not come across these cash cows before but in the dark rainy conditions and with cars parked up close to the place where I understand now cars are meant to go, and also driving a sports car which does not have the greatest grip in the wet and so would not be great going through narrow spaces, it doesn’t surprise me that I went through the middle section (I obviously did not see the signs). I assume that, unless the PCN is defective in some manner (and sorry I am not sure how to upload it) I do not have a keg to stand on but this is frankly a trap and the more so when traffic has been diverted into it. I was travelling the other way down Grange Grove by the way so the photographic evidence shows me coming towards the camera rather than away from it and also does not show the signage for my direction. I see when I search Google maps by the way that they come up with a photo that wasn’t,t taken too long ago which shows raised paving in the middle between the 2 bollsrds..
|
|
|
Wed, 21 Nov 2018 - 16:09
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
Apologies for using the same thread but this is fresh so I thought I would add to it. I was also caught out on Grange Grove a couple of weeks ago at 6:30 am in the dark and with very heavy rain. I ended up in Grange Grove having been diverted from the main road (St Paul’s Road) as I headed north to Highbury Corner because of roadworks. Also being unfamiliar with the area I have not come across these cash cows before but in the dark rainy conditions and with cars parked up close to the place where I understand now cars are meant to go, and also driving a sports car which does not have the greatest grip in the wet and so would not be great going through narrow spaces, it doesn’t surprise me that I went through the middle section (I obviously did not see the signs). I assume that, unless the PCN is defective in some manner (and sorry I am not sure how to upload it) I do not have a keg to stand on but this is frankly a trap and the more so when traffic has been diverted into it. I was travelling the other way down Grange Grove by the way so the photographic evidence shows me coming towards the camera rather than away from it and also does not show the signage for my direction. I see when I search Google maps by the way that they come up with a photo that wasn’t,t taken too long ago which shows raised paving in the middle between the 2 bollsrds.. Your PCN and the stage you are at along with the circumstances surrounding it are different. Start your own thread and post the PCN and video I've said this before but I would like to see someone take on these proxy restrictions at a judicial level. In 2018, there are no shortage of technological methods of policing a width restriction - indeed an ANPR system linked to DVLA would do it. Inventive council employee: We could set up a camera to only issue PCNs to large vehicles that ignore the width restriction Council boss: How much would that cost? Inventive council employee: Maybe 50-100k Council boss: And what would the impact be on PCNs? Inventive council employee: Well we'd issue zero to cars and vans, so motorists would be happy Council boss: And how much PCN revenue is that going to cost us? Inventive council employee: Maybe 100k a year, for every year, in perpetuity Council boss: investment denied!! Personally, I think an argument could be made re the position of the van, but without sight of the PCN I do not want to say more -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Wed, 21 Nov 2018 - 16:32
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 277 Joined: 29 Aug 2017 Member No.: 93,755 |
deleted
This post has been edited by bobthesod: Wed, 21 Nov 2018 - 19:23 |
|
|
Fri, 23 Nov 2018 - 16:35
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 12 Joined: 20 Nov 2018 Member No.: 101,040 |
Apologies for using the same thread but this is fresh so I thought I would add to it. I was also caught out on Grange Grove a couple of weeks ago at 6:30 am in the dark and with very heavy rain. I ended up in Grange Grove having been diverted from the main road (St Paul’s Road) as I headed north to Highbury Corner because of roadworks. Also being unfamiliar with the area I have not come across these cash cows before but in the dark rainy conditions and with cars parked up close to the place where I understand now cars are meant to go, and also driving a sports car which does not have the greatest grip in the wet and so would not be great going through narrow spaces, it doesn’t surprise me that I went through the middle section (I obviously did not see the signs). I assume that, unless the PCN is defective in some manner (and sorry I am not sure how to upload it) I do not have a keg to stand on but this is frankly a trap and the more so when traffic has been diverted into it. I was travelling the other way down Grange Grove by the way so the photographic evidence shows me coming towards the camera rather than away from it and also does not show the signage for my direction. I see when I search Google maps by the way that they come up with a photo that wasn’t,t taken too long ago which shows raised paving in the middle between the 2 bollsrds.. Your PCN and the stage you are at along with the circumstances surrounding it are different. Start your own thread and post the PCN and video I've said this before but I would like to see someone take on these proxy restrictions at a judicial level. In 2018, there are no shortage of technological methods of policing a width restriction - indeed an ANPR system linked to DVLA would do it. Inventive council employee: We could set up a camera to only issue PCNs to large vehicles that ignore the width restriction Council boss: How much would that cost? Inventive council employee: Maybe 50-100k Council boss: And what would the impact be on PCNs? Inventive council employee: Well we'd issue zero to cars and vans, so motorists would be happy Council boss: And how much PCN revenue is that going to cost us? Inventive council employee: Maybe 100k a year, for every year, in perpetuity Council boss: investment denied!! Personally, I think an argument could be made re the position of the van, but without sight of the PCN I do not want to say more It looks like the PCN was binned. It is very frustrating, especially as I approached it with caution and I agree - the van being there was the biggest contributing factor as to why I "ignored the Highway code" I received the official rejection letter and it simply says I broke the keep left of the sign rule, nothing to do with crossing the central area or with restrictions. I do feel like fighting it based on the van being too close and the fact that it seems immoral to be fining motorists who can clearly fit through the left lane but have inadvertently have passed through the middle. However, it's a long process back and fourth and I could potentially have to pay £130 instead. |
|
|
Sat, 24 Nov 2018 - 15:31
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Morals don't really come into it, passing the wrong side of a keep left sign has been illegal for decades. The position of the van is not so close as to make it impossible to pass on the correct side of the sign so the discount might be the best option here.
-------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 05:10 |