PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Help needed - YBJ Barnet
rjutd
post 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)
Attached File  Page_1.pdf ( 1.57MB ) Number of downloads: 52
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4 Pages V  « < 2 3 4  
Start new topic
Replies (60 - 67)
Advertisement
post Sat, 23 Feb 2019 - 22:14
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
rjutd
post 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
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post 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
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rjutd
post Sat, 6 Apr 2019 - 22:52
Post #63


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 31
Joined: 23 Feb 2019
Member No.: 102,594



QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Sat, 6 Apr 2019 - 22:48) *
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?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Sun, 7 Apr 2019 - 08:30
Post #64


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 26,655
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (rjutd @ Sat, 6 Apr 2019 - 23:52) *
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Sat, 6 Apr 2019 - 22:48) *
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
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rjutd
post Sun, 7 Apr 2019 - 13:44
Post #65


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 31
Joined: 23 Feb 2019
Member No.: 102,594



QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Sun, 7 Apr 2019 - 09:30) *
QUOTE (rjutd @ Sat, 6 Apr 2019 - 23:52) *
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Sat, 6 Apr 2019 - 22:48) *
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.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mr Meldrew
post 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
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Mon, 22 Apr 2019 - 21:00
Post #67


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 26,655
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (Mr Meldrew @ Mon, 22 Apr 2019 - 21:43) *
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
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mr Meldrew
post Mon, 22 Apr 2019 - 21:32
Post #68


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 546
Joined: 31 Aug 2015
From: 19 Riverbank
Member No.: 79,151



QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Mon, 22 Apr 2019 - 22:00) *
QUOTE (Mr Meldrew @ Mon, 22 Apr 2019 - 21:43) *
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
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V  « < 2 3 4
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 11:54
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here