London Borough of Waltham Forest PCN, Contravention 31 - Entering and stopping in a box junction |
London Borough of Waltham Forest PCN, Contravention 31 - Entering and stopping in a box junction |
Wed, 11 Apr 2018 - 23:29
Post
#1
|
||||
Member Group: Members Posts: 115 Joined: 15 Aug 2008 Member No.: 21,871 |
Hello all,
I would be very grateful indeed if someone could offer me some advice on the following, even if it’s to say it’s a slam dunk and I should just cough up, should that be the case! Local Authority: London Borough of Waltham Forest In: Hall Lane E4 / Albert Crescent E4 (cctv) Contravention 31 - Entering and stopping in a box junction when prohibited Video evidence: https://youtu.be/_6LnS8yj4mI Street view: https://tinyurl.com/y787whq2 "No5 in the list of highest-earning box junctions across London’s 32 boroughs, over the past 18 months.” according to this article: http://www.times-series.co.uk/news/1477879...or_the_council/ 'Number of PCNs issued and representations made' available here under Freedom of Information request: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/4278...chment.doc.html Incident summery: I am in the Black Golf, stuck behind the Green Fiesta on the right hand lane. I was proceeding along Hall Lane (A1009) and intending to continue straight on across the junction over the traffic lights. I am completely unfamiliar with this area never having been through here before. The traffic light is green, I can see there are no obstructions ahead, the traffic is moving forward and I enter the box junction as the Fiesta in front of me is leaving it. As I get to the other side the traffic stops, but the lights are still green and the road ahead still looks clear so I’m confused as I can’t see any cause for the sudden stop. I believed the left lane was a filter lane only for vehicles turning left and the right lane is for traffic moving straight ahead, but I now realise I’m in the wrong lane and so attempt to indicate left and change to the correct lane, which is clear of traffic and still moving. I now realise I have no room to manoeuvre and so have to edge out after reversing a little bit. In my defence I am not impeding traffic flow and there is still enough clearance for cars emerging out of Albert Crescent to turn both left and right across the box junction. When safe to do so I move into the clear lane and resume proceeding along the A1009, however the lights have now turned red. Yes, it’s all a little messy, but it was a combination of an unfamiliar junction to me and one which is slightly counter-intuitive: i.e. the junction is a little offset as can be seen on a map, so the way ahead is to the right and it looks like the right lane is the correct position to be to go forward. With that in mind the green light and clear road ahead made it seem like it was perfectly safe to now enter the box junction. How should I pursue this, if at all? Thank you for reading! |
|||
|
||||
Advertisement |
Wed, 11 Apr 2018 - 23:29
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Sun, 27 May 2018 - 02:04
Post
#41
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 115 Joined: 15 Aug 2008 Member No.: 21,871 |
Thank you for the text, I will be submitting it tomorrow. I wanted to just clarify the grammar of the following statement to see if I’ve understood it correctly:
“I contend that applying the legal tests, of not having to slavishly follow the text of the regulations the PCN must clearly convey the information required when read as a whole, (and this) has not been met. The wording of the PCN confuses as to when representations must be made and by when the authority may issue a charge certificate, as such I ask it be found non-compliant and no penalty may be demanded on the back of it.” Is the point above made with the inclusion of 'and this'? Additionally the online form offers the opportunity to upload evidence: Evidence to support your appealIs it advisable to upload the original PCN since this forms part of the appeal, or is it a given that they already have access to all those materials from the council? thanks again |
|
|
Sun, 27 May 2018 - 09:13
Post
#42
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
Thank you for the text, I will be submitting it tomorrow. I wanted to just clarify the grammar of the following statement to see if I’ve understood it correctly: “I contend that applying the legal tests, of not having to slavishly follow the text of the regulations the PCN must clearly convey the information required when read as a whole, (and this) has not been met. The wording of the PCN confuses as to when representations must be made and by when the authority may issue a charge certificate, as such I ask it be found non-compliant and no penalty may be demanded on the back of it.” Is the point above made with the inclusion of 'and this'? Additionally the online form offers the opportunity to upload evidence: Evidence to support your appealIs it advisable to upload the original PCN since this forms part of the appeal, or is it a given that they already have access to all those materials from the council? thanks again Change the paragraph to this I contend that when applying the legal tests, of not having to slavishly follow the text of the regulations, and that the document should be read as a whole, have not been met. The PCN must however clearly convey the meaning of information required. The wording of the PCN confuses as to when representations must be made and by when the authority may issue a charge certificate, as such I ask it be found non compliant and not penalty may be demanded on the back of it no need to upload the PCn but take it with you. The council are obliged to send a true copy, if they do not then they lose. So when you get the evidence pack check it and post the summary here. we may need to rebut some of what they say. This post has been edited by PASTMYBEST: Sun, 27 May 2018 - 09:14 -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Sun, 27 May 2018 - 16:51
Post
#43
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 115 Joined: 15 Aug 2008 Member No.: 21,871 |
as such I ask it be found non compliant and not penalty may be demanded on the back of it Thank you for your invaluable assistance. Sorry to query this again, but I originally thought your use of the phrase not penalty was a typo previously, so changed it to 'no'. However since you've used it again in the revised text I realise it must be intentional. Apologies for any confusion but I'm not up to speed with legal technicalities and grammar, so is the above wording OK? |
|
|
Sun, 27 May 2018 - 18:58
Post
#44
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 26,655 Joined: 6 Nov 2014 Member No.: 74,048 |
as such I ask it be found non compliant and not penalty may be demanded on the back of it Thank you for your invaluable assistance. Sorry to query this again, but I originally thought your use of the phrase not penalty was a typo previously, so changed it to 'no'. However since you've used it again in the revised text I realise it must be intentional. Apologies for any confusion but I'm not up to speed with legal technicalities and grammar, so is the above wording OK? Your right a typo, i just re read the bit you queried not all of it. If you think it is a typo in the rest of the text it probably is -------------------- All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
|
|
|
Fri, 13 Jul 2018 - 07:11
Post
#45
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 115 Joined: 15 Aug 2008 Member No.: 21,871 |
Just updating this thread because the decision came in today. An enormous 'Thank You' to everyone here who helped explain and offer advice on the issues, particularly PASTMYBEST in formulating a defence. Basically, it looks like Waltham Forest were a no-show!
QUOTE The adjudicator, having considered the evidence submitted by the parties, has allowed the appeal. The adjudicator directs London Borough of Waltham Forest to cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and the Notice to Owner. Adjudicator's Reasons: The Authority was successfully notified on 31 May and 19 June 2018 by the Tribunal that the appeal would be heard today. The Authority has failed to produce a copy of the Penalty Charge Notice or any other evidence. Without a copy of the Penalty Charge Notice there is no evidence that a contravention occurred. I must therefore allow this appeal without consideration of any of the issues raised by either party. This has been an education for me, but also an eye-opener and insight into this particular legislation and its use/abuse. Thank you all again, and I hope there are many similar sucess stories. This post has been edited by efunc: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 - 07:13 |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 06:42 |