PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

High Rd Leytonstone E11 YBJ
TheMuffinMan
post Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 10:23
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 22 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,697



Hi all,

Please see below images of a recent PCN I had through from a recent trip to Stratford for an alleged contravention 31, entering and stopping in a box junction when prohibited. I've also linked the video evidence below.

I have already decided to appeal the PCN but I am hoping you could health check my reasoning and response and add any other comments you may feel beneficial. If unclear, and to provide context, I am the grey Ford in the pictures/video. Road conditions were good, visibility was fairly clear however this is not a route I am familiar with.

The basis of my argument for appeal is that I was prevented from exiting the YBJ because the 2 vehicles in front stopped unnecessarily and therefore prevented my exit.

Further points I will use to support this will be.

-Cause for traffic to slow is lanes merging, Being unfamiliar with the route I was unaware the lanes were to merge. There is no signage in advance of TBJ to advise of this, and with traffic merging after junction it is very difficult to see that traffic does not continue in 2 lanes, particularly due to traffic lights for oncoming traffic partially obscuring view of single lane merged traffic 2-300 yds after junction.

- View that traffic was due to merge was further hampered by SGV and van travelling in front of my side by side. Therefore first indication of a merge, and therefore for potential for traffic to slow, was via the merge arrow on the ground roughly adjacent to where I eventually came to a stop.

- In the video you will see traffic is moving fairly well, although the BMW has brake lights on as I enter the YBJ the lorry in front does not.

- At 08.55 the BMW begins to slow to an almost complete stop despite being clear in front. I could have moved to the space to the RHS however it being clear in front I didnt feel it was necessary and shortly after the C1 behind me does just that.

- Between 08.56 and 09.09 you will see me attempting to continue to make progress as the BMW has left an unnecessary 2-3m gap in front blocking my exit.

- Moreover, the lorry also leaves unnecessary space in front, which at the time of entering YBJ I could have no indication would it would not progress to fill, as at that time it did not have its brake lights on.

- At time of being stationary in YBJ approx rear 1/4 of car is in YBJ and not blocking any routes.

Attached Image


Attached Image


Attached Image


Attached Image


https://viewmypcn.co.uk/view.aspx

If the link above requires you to enter login, details are:
PCN # - FR26103185
VRN - AE66 WNG

I would love to know what your thoughts are on the above, whether it is all relevant, and whether there is anything else I should be saying or a way to construct my argument to give me a best chance of a cancellation. It would be great to hear what your thoughts are on my chances too.

I guess I'm expecting to get asked why I didnt either 1) take the space the C1 did, 2) dart to the left of the BMW to get out of the YBJ....good question. I've been shouting it at the screen as I watched the video evidence for the last couple of hours.

Finally, does anyone know how to download the video evidence from Waltham Forest BC website. I can view but it wont let me right click and download it. any tips?

Thanks in advance for everyone for your help.

The Muffin Man
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 7)
Advertisement
post Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 10:23
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 10:40
Post #2


Member


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



They are good sometimes.

The contravention is 50/50 did you have to stop because of stationary vehicles ?? there were escape routes but you did not take them. But your argument is reasonable.

Page 2 of the PCN the paragraph under the box on to pay, tells you that if payment is not made by the end of the 28 day period (date of notice) then an increased charge may be made and a charge certificate may be issued.

This is wrong the CC may not be issued until 28 days beginning with date of service. some two days later. Adjudications have won on this alone.

They however compound this by telling you it will then be to late to make representations. Again, no, The representation period is the same as the CC period, so they have truncated your right to make reps by two days


--------------------
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
TheMuffinMan
post Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 10:50
Post #3


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 22 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,697



Thanks appreciate your thoughts and assistance.

TMM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 11:35
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



Here's video. Excruciating to watch because you had bags of room to move out of the box on the left... I agree with PMB - 50/50 as some adjudicators take a hard line.

Full video:



Trying out animated GIF - limited to 20 seconds:

via Imgflip GIF Maker

This post has been edited by stamfordman: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 12:01
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 12:15
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,268
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



Others here will tell you that I never have much sympathy for YBJ PCNs but I
do in this case.
It's driver mentality causing the problems.

I go 'weapons live' every time I approach that one.
One problem is the merge arrows (two of them). The left lane is frequently clear and the
merge isn't necessary for another 12 car positions. But I see people in the left baulk at
proceeding, not wanting to be seen as queue jumping. Not much better in your lane, as you
found out, which at that point is briefly a middle lane.

I've often been stopped coming out of that side road - luckily the box stops short.
People drive just a few metres out from there, clear to their left but see the merge arrow
and throw out an anchor, thinking they have to take the right lane immediately.
The result is about six cars left at the lights that could have cleared.

From your position I've frequently sailed up the left, giving consideration for those trying to cross
the box behind me, only to meet abuse when I reach the real merge point.

People hang to the right far too much already, without premature road markings telling
them to do just that.

--
Rant for the day. biggrin.gif

On contravention 35/65 but the legal issue on PCN should deter them.
But you'll need to understand it, so ask any questions you have.



--------------------
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 11 May 2018 - 12:30) *
Neil is good at working backwards.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TheMuffinMan
post Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 12:41
Post #6


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 22 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,697



Thanks both,

I think I understand, let me confirm.

Basically you are saying that the WFBC has issued a PCN which misrepresents the length of time I have to both pay the penalty charge at a discounted rate and my ability to make representations against the PCN as they advise this is a 28 period from then date of notice as opposed to the date of service. Therefore the procedural impropriety at the issuing of the PCN via the misreputations made regarding my rights to make representations undermine the lawfulness of the enforcement process.

Something like this?

Thanks,
TMM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 12:56
Post #7


Member


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



QUOTE (TheMuffinMan @ Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 12:41) *
Thanks both,

I think I understand, let me confirm.

Basically you are saying that the WFBC has issued a PCN which misrepresents the length of time I have to both pay the penalty charge at a discounted rate and my ability to make representations against the PCN as they advise this is a 28 period from then date of notice as opposed to the date of service. Therefore the procedural impropriety at the issuing of the PCN via the misreputations made regarding my rights to make representations undermine the lawfulness of the enforcement process.

Something like this?

Thanks,
TMM


Not the discounted rate, no that is stated correctly at 14 days. As is the 28 days to pay. it is what happens if you don't. In essence

the payment period expires on the 28th day beginning with date of notice so the 19th of March. but you are allowed to make representations (challenge) until the 21st of March

They say they may issue a CC increasing the penalty on the 19th but the regulation only allows that this be on the 21st

this case highlights the issue

2170469036

he Appellant has not attended and the Authority is not represented.
The Authority's case is that the Appellant's vehicle was stopped in the box junction when prohibited when in Finchley Road/Bridge Lane on 27 June 2017 at 17.27.
The Appellant's case is that he had anticipated that the exit would be clear.
He also takes a point on the Penalty Charge Notice in relation to the time permitted time for representations to be considered and referred me to the case of Atlas - v Barnet case number 2170053479.
I have considered the evidence and I have allowed this appeal on the truncated period point that an Authority must consider representations. I have copied into this decision the relevant part of the Atlas case.
"Section 4(8)(a) of the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003 provides that A penalty charge notice under this section must [amongst other things] state ... (iii) that the penalty charge must be paid before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of the notice; ... (v) that, if the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period, an increased charge may be payable; (vi) the amount of the increased charge; ... and (viii) that the person on whom the notice is served may be entitled to make representations under paragraph 1 of Schedule 1 to the Act; and (8)(b) requires that they specify the form in which any such representations are to be made.
Paragraph 1(3) of the Schedule provides that the enforcing authority may disregard any such representations which are received by them after the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date on which the penalty charge notice in question was served. {effectively 28 days + 2 days}
Mr Atlas correctly points out that in this case the Penalty Charge Notice states: 'The penalty charge of £130 must be paid not later than the last day of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of this notice. If the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period and no representations have been made, an increased charge of 50% to £195 may be payable and a charge certificate may be issued.'
Mr Atlas submits that this wording is not compliant with the requirements of the 2003 Act and, further, effectively limits the time he has to make representations.
I accept this submission. The wording does not comply with the requirements of the Act and therefore effectively limits the time a recipient has to make representations or, indeed, to pay the full penalty charge before a Charge Certificate is issued."
Accordingly, this appeal is allowed.





--------------------
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
TheMuffinMan
post Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 13:02
Post #8


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 22 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,697



Ah, understood, I'll amend and go back with this and reference this case.

Thanks,
Jim
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

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 - 23:34
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