Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: [NIP Wizard] COFP given for doing a u-turn
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
mailpaul32
NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? -
Date of the offence: - July 2013
Date of the NIP: - 3 days after the offence
Date you received the NIP: - 7 days after the offence
Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - Junction of Cromwell road/Earls court road
Was the NIP addressed to you? - Yes
Was the NIP sent by first class post, second class or recorded delivery? - Not known
If your are not the Registered Keeper, what is your relationship to the vehicle? -
How many current points do you have? - 0
Provide a description of events (if you know what happened) telling us as much about the incident as possible - some things that may seem trivial to you may be important, so don't leave anything out. Please do not post personal details for obvious reasons - I made a U-turn on a junction on the A4 after the Hammersmith flyover. The junction had "ahead-only" and "right-only" filter arrows. It did not have any 'no u-turn' sign.

After a few yards, a police van stopped me and asked me to pull over. They asked me if I knew why I was stopped. I said no. Then they said that I am not under arrest but they have to tell me that whatever I say can and will be used against me in the court of law or something like that.

When I asked what my offence was, they said that I was not supposed to make the u-turn.

After that, one of the officers started asking me questions and started recording my responses in a plain notepad word by word. I can't remember exactly what she asked or what I said but overall, I just said that I thought the u-turn could be made because there was no sign saying it can't be done.

Then they asked for an ID like driving licence and I handed it to him. He asked me if I owned the car and for how long I had owned it. I replied.

Then he must have checked me up after which he came back and gave some explanation that you cannot go in any direction and that you don't need a sign to tell you everything etc. He then asked me to brush up my highway code.

One week from that, I received a conditional offer of fixed penalty for £60 and 3 points. That has two issues:

1. It states M/v fail to comply with red / green arrow signals and cites offence code TS02005. Upon looking it up on the web, it isn't the right code as I did comply with the red/green arrow signal.

2. I genuinely thought that it was legal to make a u-turn as there wasn't a sign unlike numerous other signals on the A4 and other roads where there are the same filter arrows and they put up no u-turn signs.


NIP Wizard Responses
These were the responses used by the Wizard to arrive at its recommendation:
Have you received a NIP? - No
Are you the Registered Keeper of the vehicle concerned (is your name and address on the V5/V5C)? - Yes
Did the first NIP arrive within 14 days? - Yes
Although you are the Registered Keeper, were you also the keeper of the vehicle concerned (the person normally responsible for it) at the time of the alleged offence? - Yes
Were you driving? - Yes
Which country did the alleged offence take place in? - England

NIP Wizard Recommendation
Based on these responses the Wizard suggested that this course of action should be considered:
  • The law requires you to provide the information requested in the Section 172 notice within the 28 day period, naming yourself as the driver. If you are considering obtaining formal legal advice, do so before returning the notice.

    You should note that there is nothing to be gained by responding any earlier than you have to at any stage of the process. You are likely to receive a Conditional Offer of a Fixed Penalty (COFP) and further reminder(s). If you want to continue the fight, you should ignore all correspondence from the police until you receive a summons. You need to understand from the outset that while you will receive much help and support from members on the forums, you will need to put time and effort into fighting your case and ultimately be prepared to stand up in court to defend yourself.

Generated by the PePiPoo NIP Wizard v3.3.2: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 19:04:23 +0000
Logician
Hmm, did you in fact comply with the green arrow directing you to turn right, when you did not turn right but did a U-turn? You started off steering to the right, certainly, but then steered back on your original direction of travel and did not exit the junction to the right. Is that any different to the situation with a "ahead only" arrow to starting off going ahead, but then turning left and exiting the junction to the left?
lomast
post up a google street view of the junction in question, It is not unknown for BTP to make odd mistakes when it comes to traffic offences
mailpaul32
That's where I'm confused. There are so many other junctions that have an explicit 'no u-turn' arrow against the right arrow. I've also seen those where there is just 'ahead only' arrow with a no u-turn sign next to it.

So if there is no u-turn sign, then I assumed that it is legal to do a u-turn?

Google street view of the junction

https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=51.494677,...1,0.38&z=17
baggins1234
If you are where the blue car is in the right hand lane in the foreground of the street view then the arrows below the traffic lights instruct ahead only


http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum_dg/gr...t/dg_070642.pdf


mailpaul32
QUOTE (baggins1234 @ Fri, 12 Jul 2013 - 20:56) *
If you are where the blue car is in the right hand lane in the foreground of the street view then the arrows below the traffic lights instruct ahead only


http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum_dg/gr...t/dg_070642.pdf



I was in the turn-right lanes to the right of the blue car - here's another view of the same junction

https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=51.494677,...,11.76&z=19
panason1c
I made a U-turn on a junction on the A4 after the Hammersmith flyover. The junction had "ahead-only" and "right-only" filter arrows. It did not have any 'no u-turn' sign.


A 'Right only' arrow means exactly what it says, and therefore, at this particular design of junction, negates the need for a 'No U turn' sign ....... you performed a U turn and thus contravened the 'right only' order.

I am a LGV driver and this is how I interpret your predicament. Happy to be corrected though.
mailpaul32
QUOTE (panason1c @ Fri, 12 Jul 2013 - 21:25) *
I made a U-turn on a junction on the A4 after the Hammersmith flyover. The junction had "ahead-only" and "right-only" filter arrows. It did not have any 'no u-turn' sign.


A 'Right only' arrow means exactly what it says, and therefore negates the need for a 'No U turn' sign ....... you performed a U turn and thus contravened the 'right only' order.

I am a LGV driver and this is how I interpret your predicament. Happy to be corrected though.



Ok - so what do you make of the below? These are on the same A4 road but around a different part of London where I'm used to driving on a regular basis.

https://maps.google.co.uk/?ll=51.481704,-0....1,80.57,,0,3.45

https://maps.google.co.uk/?ll=51.482652,-0....1,86.83,,0,2.71

And this is on the A30


https://maps.google.co.uk/?ll=51.467069,-0....2,61.34,,0,4.11
uk_mike
You may only proceed in the direction shown by the arrows. A U turn can only be done where there are no arrows and no no U turn sign.

The no U turn signs with arrows is optional, used or extra emphasis at junctions where there is a history contraventions causing collisions or danger to pedestrians. It not being there does not negate the offence of disobeying the arrows.

What happens at other junctions has no relevance to your offence.
Logician
No doubt I will corrected if wrong, but I think disobeying a green light direction is an endorsable offence, disobeying a white arrow or indeed a "no U-turn" sign is an offence but not endorsable.
mailpaul32
QUOTE (uk_mike @ Fri, 12 Jul 2013 - 22:12) *
You may only proceed in the direction shown by the arrows. A U turn can only be done where there are no arrows and no no U turn sign.

The no U turn signs with arrows is optional, used or extra emphasis at junctions where there is a history contraventions causing collisions or danger to pedestrians. It not being there does not negate the offence of disobeying the arrows.

What happens at other junctions has no relevance to your offence.


What is the source of what you've written here? Highway code? Govt legislation? Or just your own judgement?

Because if it's your judgement, then my judgement says that if there is a prohibitive sign, only then that manoeuvre is prohibited. Or else it is not. You don't put up a 'no right turn' sign where right turn is allowed. I use the same logic for u-turn unless there is a law that explicitly states that some different rules apply to u-turns.
Kickaha
So by your logic, if there was an ahead only sign, you could turn right or left or indeed make a u-turn as they are not specifically prohibited.
sgtdixie
QUOTE (mailpaul32 @ Fri, 12 Jul 2013 - 22:58) *
QUOTE (uk_mike @ Fri, 12 Jul 2013 - 22:12) *
You may only proceed in the direction shown by the arrows. A U turn can only be done where there are no arrows and no no U turn sign.

The no U turn signs with arrows is optional, used or extra emphasis at junctions where there is a history contraventions causing collisions or danger to pedestrians. It not being there does not negate the offence of disobeying the arrows.

What happens at other junctions has no relevance to your offence.


What is the source of what you've written here? Highway code? Govt legislation? Or just your own judgement?

Because if it's your judgement, then my judgement says that if there is a prohibitive sign, only then that manoeuvre is prohibited. Or else it is not. You don't put up a 'no right turn' sign where right turn is allowed. I use the same logic for u-turn unless there is a law that explicitly states that some different rules apply to u-turns.


Read the Highway code, then the DfT leaflet 'Know your Traffic Signs' and you will find your judgement is wrong.
panason1c
QUOTE (mailpaul32 @ Fri, 12 Jul 2013 - 22:58) *
QUOTE (uk_mike @ Fri, 12 Jul 2013 - 22:12) *
You may only proceed in the direction shown by the arrows. A U turn can only be done where there are no arrows and no no U turn sign.

The no U turn signs with arrows is optional, used or extra emphasis at junctions where there is a history contraventions causing collisions or danger to pedestrians. It not being there does not negate the offence of disobeying the arrows.

What happens at other junctions has no relevance to your offence.


What is the source of what you've written here? Highway code? Govt legislation? Or just your own judgement?

Because if it's your judgement, then my judgement says that if there is a prohibitive sign, only then that manoeuvre is prohibited. Or else it is not. You don't put up a 'no right turn' sign where right turn is allowed. I use the same logic for u-turn unless there is a law that explicitly states that some different rules apply to u-turns.


Just my judgement with a tad of common sense and a pinch of 40yrs driving experience.
The Rookie
Please tell us all where you are driving so we can be somewhere (anywhere) else.

There is a right turn arrow, therefor right turn it is, instead of fudgement and 40 years poor driving as 'experience' (based on the fact you are trying to defend the indeffensable), try reading the HC!
sgtdixie
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sat, 13 Jul 2013 - 06:39) *
Please tell us all where you are driving so we can be somewhere (anywhere) else.

There is a right turn arrow, therefor right turn it is, instead of fudgement and 40 years poor driving as 'experience' (based on the fact you are trying to defend the indeffensable), try reading the HC!


Think this may be aimed at the wrong person.
JP1978
The Ahead ONLY arrow is pretty obvious, it says ONLY. The Right (or left) Turn arrow doesnt say ONLY on the HC, so surley what the OP did is legal??

Oh, and why are BTP enforcing traffic regs..... can they do that? I thought they could only deal with issues outside the railway system if requested by normal BiB or if it was land adj to railways and was a serious event? (I hope to learn from the replies as it seems my understanding is incorrect)
666
QUOTE (JP1978 @ Sat, 13 Jul 2013 - 10:58) *
The Right (or left) Turn arrow doesnt say ONLY on the HC, so surley what the OP did is legal??


The HC says "If the way is clear you may go but only in the direction shown by the arrow.". Page 102.
.
uk_mike
QUOTE (mailpaul32 @ Fri, 12 Jul 2013 - 22:58) *
What is the source of what you've written here? Highway code? Govt legislation? Or just your own judgement?


The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 No 34 and Schedule 2
The current edition of The Highway Code
Know your Traffic Signs
Traffic Signs Manual Chapter 3

There is a difference between prohibitive (red circle) and instructional (blue circle) and traffic signals are different yet again.
It's all covered in the Highway Code and in greater detail in Know Your Traffic Signs.

I prefer to leave judgements to the courts. We are trying to give you advice as to your legal position, if you do not like the advice that is your prerogative.
panason1c
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sat, 13 Jul 2013 - 06:39) *
Please tell us all where you are driving so we can be somewhere (anywhere) else.

There is a right turn arrow, therefor right turn it is, instead of fudgement and 40 years poor driving as 'experience' (based on the fact you are trying to defend the indeffensable), try reading the HC!

As already pointed out, you seem to have directed your post (above) at the wrong person!. Try re-reading all of my posts (slowly) . An apology will be accepted with grace. Meanwhile, . I offer my apologies for mistakenly replying to post 14. (-:
southpaw82
QUOTE (JP1978 @ Sat, 13 Jul 2013 - 10:58) *
Oh, and why are BTP enforcing traffic regs..... can they do that? I thought they could only deal with issues outside the railway system if requested by normal BiB or if it was land adj to railways and was a serious event? (I hope to learn from the replies as it seems my understanding is incorrect)


Indeed. Their jurisdiction was extended to include cases where action was necessary but no territorial officer was available. You could argue the test wasn't fulfilled here (report him like any MoP and let the force issue an NIP) but I suspect courts would interpret their jurisdiction widely.
StuartBu
edited out
The Rookie
QUOTE (mailpaul32 @ Fri, 12 Jul 2013 - 20:38) *

Keep up stu!
StuartBu
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sun, 14 Jul 2013 - 00:24) *
QUOTE (mailpaul32 @ Fri, 12 Jul 2013 - 20:38) *

Keep up stu!



Haha...I never even noticed there was a Page 1..

QUOTE (panason1c @ Sat, 13 Jul 2013 - 13:11) *
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sat, 13 Jul 2013 - 06:39) *
Please tell us all where you are driving so we can be somewhere (anywhere) else.

There is a right turn arrow, therefor right turn it is, instead of fudgement and 40 years poor driving as 'experience' (based on the fact you are trying to defend the indeffensable), try reading the HC!

As already pointed out, you seem to have directed your post (above) at the wrong person!. Try re-reading all of my posts (slowly) . An apology will be accepted with grace. Meanwhile, . I offer my apologies for mistakenly replying to post 14. (-:


That's what happens when folk reply to something that wasn't aimed at them ( Post 14 was it ) and then someone else replies to that ..and so it goes on ..lol
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2019 Invision Power Services, Inc.