PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Central Hill YBJ, Entered, but stopped for a few seconds only.
theeagleman
post Mon, 10 Feb 2020 - 11:26
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 95
Joined: 4 Mar 2019
Member No.: 102,740



Hi,

I do think personally there is a huge case for this one given the path was not clear as such.

Please let me know of any opinions you may have.

Thanks in advance!








Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 8)
Advertisement
post Mon, 10 Feb 2020 - 11:26
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
stamfordman
post Mon, 10 Feb 2020 - 11:42
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14,037
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



The stop was only about 2 seconds so good case for being trivial (de minimis).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
theeagleman
post Mon, 10 Feb 2020 - 11:51
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 95
Joined: 4 Mar 2019
Member No.: 102,740



Thanks, i had a feeling that would be perhaps the only reason.

Stopping will indicate the "wheels not being in motion" right? The car did overall stay longer than 5 seconds within the box junction itself, although was moving most of the time.

I also assume Lambeth will outright reject this and this will have to all the way to adjudication?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
theeagleman
post Tue, 11 Feb 2020 - 16:05
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 95
Joined: 4 Mar 2019
Member No.: 102,740



Dear Sir/Madam,

I would like to appeal the PCN XXXXX on the basis that I was only in the box junction for a matter of seconds.
I in no way dispute that I did enter the box junction and the path ahead was not as clear as I expected it to be, however the traffic from my angle was free flowing.
I would like to raise the point of de minmis, as the time spent in the box junction was merely trivial.

Please kindly review the evidence and video and you will see it was only about 2-3 seconds where I was stationary.

I ask you cancel this PCN

Kind regards,

RK



Any thoughts on the above? or anything anyone can shed light on?
Thanks
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mr Meldrew
post Wed, 12 Feb 2020 - 00:15
Post #5


Member


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



OP, I offer this should you challenge.

Dear Sir/Madam,

(References)

I refer to the evidence. The two seconds my vehicle was seen stationary within the yellow box junction was so brief as to be inconsequential and not a sufficient cause of action since the law does not concern itself with trifles. The legal principle of ‘de minimus non curat lex’ plainly applies in this case.

Accordingly, this does not amount to a contravention. I trust you will cancel the above penalty charge.

Yours faithfully,

theeagleman

This post has been edited by Mr Meldrew: Wed, 12 Feb 2020 - 00:53


--------------------
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
theeagleman
post Wed, 12 Feb 2020 - 21:34
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 95
Joined: 4 Mar 2019
Member No.: 102,740



Thank you very much!
Much better written, than my own.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
theeagleman
post Thu, 21 May 2020 - 18:20
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 95
Joined: 4 Mar 2019
Member No.: 102,740



Sorry been away for a whilte, lambeth rejected the claim, then went to adjudication and they agreed on the de minimus element.

Thanks again for all your help!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Thu, 21 May 2020 - 19:17
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14,037
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



It was de minimis at worst, as even Michael Burke agreed:

2200084001

The allegation in this case is entering and stopping in a box junction when prohibited. Mr. xxxx does not dispute this but says that this was only for 2 seconds and argues this was ‘de minimis’.

The enforcement camera footage shows that it was a poor decision of Mr. xxxxx to enter the box junction as there was an obvious danger he would not be able to clear the box junction without stopping and it is only by good fortune that he has any ground of appeal. However, I am not satisfied that the vehicle did come to a full halt and if it did this would have been so brief as to be de minimis. Accordingly I allow the appeal.


-----------------

Lambeth have been trying it on with de minimis in this box as there is another allowed appeal from a contravention just 2 days before:

2200062938

The Appellant is appealing a Penalty Charge Notice issued in respect of entering and stopping in a box junction at the above location.

The Enforcement Authority relies upon CCTV footage of the incident.

The Appellant contends that he did not actually stop on the junction.

I have carefully considered all the evidence in this matter.

The Enforcement Authority's case is that the Appellant's vehicle entered the box junction, and then stopped in the junction owing to tationary traffic impeding its exit from the box.

Under Paragraph 11(1) in Part 7 of Schedule 9 to the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 a box junction marking conveys the prohibition that a person must not cause a vehicle to enter the box junction so that the vehicle has to stop within the box marking due to the presence of a stationary vehicle
The CCTV evidence that the Authority has provided shows the Appellant's vehicle proceeding across the junction. The vehicle does come to a halt for a very short period of time - less than two seconds. Although the EA has established that a contravention has in fact taken place, I am of the view that the vehicle was stationary for such a short period of time, as to fall within the "de minimis" principle and accordingly, I allow this appeal.

----------


There's also an allowed one on the location, which is interesting as Central Hill is one of the roads at the junction but not enough for Mr Chan:

2200050076

The PCN alleges that the Appellant vehicle stopped in a box junction at Central Hill.

The Appellant said that he turned left from Gipsy Hill into Westow Hill and he had not entered Central Hill during this manoeuvre.

The Appellant did turn left from Gipsy Hill into Westow Hill. However, the allegation is not about travelling along Central Hill. I am satisfied that while turning left from Gipsy Hill into Westow Hill, the Appellant went into and stopped in a box junction. The Authority said that this box junction is on Central Hill.

Gipsy Hill, Westow Hill, Central Hill and Westow Street meet at the junction in question. The issue is whether this junction can be described as being on Central Hill.

I do not think that such a description is adequate. One can travel straight ahead across the junction from Central Hill into Westow Hill. The description in the PCN can therefore be describing a stoppage during left turn from Gipsy Hill into Westow Hill, or a stoppage when one crosses from Central Hill into Westow Hill, or in deed a right turn from Westow Street into Westow Hill.

The PCN does not adequately indicate the reason why the Authority believes that a contravention has occurred. It cannot be upheld. I allow the appeal.

This post has been edited by stamfordman: Thu, 21 May 2020 - 19:31
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
theeagleman
post Thu, 21 May 2020 - 23:03
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 95
Joined: 4 Mar 2019
Member No.: 102,740



Made a lot money from that YBJ i am sure.

And Mr Chan went in! Very interesting to test in future cases should the need arise. valid point though as its literally in the middle of all 3 junctions - so what road does it actually fall under.
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: Tuesday, 2nd June 2020 - 02:25
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.