Help needed - YBJ Barnet |
Help needed - YBJ Barnet |
Sat, 23 Feb 2019 - 22:14
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 31 Joined: 23 Feb 2019 Member No.: 102,594 |
Today I received YBJ PCN from Barnet council.
Date of contravention 06/02/2019 16:07 Street High Street (EN5), junction with Wood Street Location 055CUV1 Contravention Code 31J Contravention Entering and stopping in a box junction when prohibited Video https://streamable.com/q57ue - Grey Car entering YBJ at 16:07:44 Images This post has been edited by rjutd: Mon, 25 Feb 2019 - 18:21
Attached File(s)
|
|
|
Advertisement |
Sat, 23 Feb 2019 - 22:14
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Sat, 6 Apr 2019 - 04:34
Post
#61
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 31 Joined: 23 Feb 2019 Member No.: 102,594 |
Thanks
This post has been edited by rjutd: Sat, 6 Apr 2019 - 04:42 |
|
|
Sat, 6 Apr 2019 - 21:48
Post
#62
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
Here you go add the details required convert to PDF and send
https://1drv.ms/w/s!AtBHPhdJdppVrwFJN1MabcVcnEr4 -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Sat, 6 Apr 2019 - 22:52
Post
#63
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 31 Joined: 23 Feb 2019 Member No.: 102,594 |
Here you go add the details required convert to PDF and send https://1drv.ms/w/s!AtBHPhdJdppVrwFJN1MabcVcnEr4 Thanks a lot, PASTMYBEST. I've submitted with no further evidence to follow option. I may not be able to attend the hearing in person. Hope it is fine. Do I need to inform the tribunal in advance if I am unable to make it in person? |
|
|
Sun, 7 Apr 2019 - 08:30
Post
#64
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
Here you go add the details required convert to PDF and send https://1drv.ms/w/s!AtBHPhdJdppVrwFJN1MabcVcnEr4 Thanks a lot, PASTMYBEST. I've submitted with no further evidence to follow option. I may not be able to attend the hearing in person. Hope it is fine. Do I need to inform the tribunal in advance if I am unable to make it in person? yes inform them its better to be courteous -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Sun, 7 Apr 2019 - 13:44
Post
#65
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 31 Joined: 23 Feb 2019 Member No.: 102,594 |
Here you go add the details required convert to PDF and send https://1drv.ms/w/s!AtBHPhdJdppVrwFJN1MabcVcnEr4 Thanks a lot, PASTMYBEST. I've submitted with no further evidence to follow option. I may not be able to attend the hearing in person. Hope it is fine. Do I need to inform the tribunal in advance if I am unable to make it in person? yes inform them its better to be courteous Thanks PASTMYBEST. Will do. |
|
|
Mon, 22 Apr 2019 - 20:43
Post
#66
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 546 Joined: 31 Aug 2015 From: 19 Riverbank Member No.: 79,151 |
2190116061 adjudicator Jane Anderson
QUOTE The penalty charge notice (pcn) was issued on the ground that the vehicle entered and stopped in a box junction when prohibited. There is photographic and CCTV evidence. The footage shows that the exit of the box junction was not clear when the appellant's vehicle entered it. Further, it shows that the vehicle had to stop in the box because of stationary traffic. The appellant states there was free movement of traffic. He claims that a driver ahead came to a halt to give precedence to a kerbside vehicle and this caused his vehicle to pause for a de minimis 4 seconds. The Regulations provide “…no person shall cause a vehicle to enter the box junction so that the vehicle has to stop within the box due to the presence of stationary vehicles.” Paragraph 174 of the Highway Code provides that a vehicle must not enter the box until its exit road or lane is clear. I find as fact that the vehicle was forced to stop in the box junction due to the presence of stationary vehicles. Further, I find as fact that the exit of the box was not clear when the vehicle entered it. The appellant's account does not provide an exemption. My opinion is that this decision was defective concerning “not clear”. The contravention occurs if at the time the motorist first enters the box junction there is a vehicle(s) in front moving or stationary within the box or immediately outside so that there is insufficient space at the other side for their vehicle to stop in and their vehicle (or any part of it) comes to a stop in the box because of another stationary vehicle. Whilst the photographic and CCTV evidence supports the finding that the exit of the box junction was not clear when the appellant's vehicle entered because there were vehicles in front moving within the box and immediately outside, and that it was forced to stop in the box because of another stationary vehicle, it lacks any consideration of the critical factor also supported by the evidence that at the time the appellant first entered the box there was in fact sufficient space for the appellant’s vehicle to stop in at the other side, and therefore the contravention just cited cannot have occurred. -------------------- I do tend to have a bee in my bonnet re failing to consider and fairness
|
|
|
Mon, 22 Apr 2019 - 21:00
Post
#67
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
2190116061 adjudicator Jane Anderson QUOTE The penalty charge notice (pcn) was issued on the ground that the vehicle entered and stopped in a box junction when prohibited. There is photographic and CCTV evidence. The footage shows that the exit of the box junction was not clear when the appellant's vehicle entered it. Further, it shows that the vehicle had to stop in the box because of stationary traffic. The appellant states there was free movement of traffic. He claims that a driver ahead came to a halt to give precedence to a kerbside vehicle and this caused his vehicle to pause for a de minimis 4 seconds. The Regulations provide “…no person shall cause a vehicle to enter the box junction so that the vehicle has to stop within the box due to the presence of stationary vehicles.” Paragraph 174 of the Highway Code provides that a vehicle must not enter the box until its exit road or lane is clear. I find as fact that the vehicle was forced to stop in the box junction due to the presence of stationary vehicles. Further, I find as fact that the exit of the box was not clear when the vehicle entered it. The appellant's account does not provide an exemption. My opinion is that this decision was defective concerning “not clear”. The contravention occurs if at the time the motorist first enters the box junction there is a vehicle(s) in front moving or stationary within the box or immediately outside so that there is insufficient space at the other side for their vehicle to stop in and their vehicle (or any part of it) comes to a stop in the box because of another stationary vehicle. Whilst the photographic and CCTV evidence supports the finding that the exit of the box junction was not clear when the appellant's vehicle entered because there were vehicles in front moving within the box and immediately outside, and that it was forced to stop in the box because of another stationary vehicle, it lacks any consideration of the critical factor also supported by the evidence that at the time the appellant first entered the box there was in fact sufficient space for the appellant’s vehicle to stop in at the other side, and therefore the contravention just cited cannot have occurred. If that is the correct decision, then there are ample grounds for review, only one of the points having been covered. -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Mon, 22 Apr 2019 - 21:32
Post
#68
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 546 Joined: 31 Aug 2015 From: 19 Riverbank Member No.: 79,151 |
2190116061 adjudicator Jane Anderson QUOTE The penalty charge notice (pcn) was issued on the ground that the vehicle entered and stopped in a box junction when prohibited. There is photographic and CCTV evidence. The footage shows that the exit of the box junction was not clear when the appellant's vehicle entered it. Further, it shows that the vehicle had to stop in the box because of stationary traffic. The appellant states there was free movement of traffic. He claims that a driver ahead came to a halt to give precedence to a kerbside vehicle and this caused his vehicle to pause for a de minimis 4 seconds. The Regulations provide “…no person shall cause a vehicle to enter the box junction so that the vehicle has to stop within the box due to the presence of stationary vehicles.” Paragraph 174 of the Highway Code provides that a vehicle must not enter the box until its exit road or lane is clear. I find as fact that the vehicle was forced to stop in the box junction due to the presence of stationary vehicles. Further, I find as fact that the exit of the box was not clear when the vehicle entered it. The appellant's account does not provide an exemption. My opinion is that this decision was defective concerning “not clear”. The contravention occurs if at the time the motorist first enters the box junction there is a vehicle(s) in front moving or stationary within the box or immediately outside so that there is insufficient space at the other side for their vehicle to stop in and their vehicle (or any part of it) comes to a stop in the box because of another stationary vehicle. Whilst the photographic and CCTV evidence supports the finding that the exit of the box junction was not clear when the appellant's vehicle entered because there were vehicles in front moving within the box and immediately outside, and that it was forced to stop in the box because of another stationary vehicle, it lacks any consideration of the critical factor also supported by the evidence that at the time the appellant first entered the box there was in fact sufficient space for the appellant’s vehicle to stop in at the other side, and therefore the contravention just cited cannot have occurred. If that is the correct decision, then there are ample grounds for review, only one of the points having been covered. Yes, yes and yes. -------------------- I do tend to have a bee in my bonnet re failing to consider and fairness
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 11:54 |