Lowlander

Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Given my route is ED to LB with a Monthly ticket, > it tells me there were 59 instances where I could > have claimed a sum of ?70+. How does this work as > I can't possibly have been affected by all 59 > delays? It gives all instances where there would have been a 30 minute+ delay. Which looks to work out at 2 trains a day out of 130 trains on our route (including weekends). You have to be quite unlucky to get more than one 30 minute+ delay a month. In other words unless you fraudulently submit claims you'd lose money on this website.

You can check actual train arrival times from the past here http://www.recenttraintimes.co.uk/ and do it all yourself for free. Since you have to be delayed for more than 30 minutes on the mainline it's not often from East Dulwich that you'd be eligible. I've got a point to point season ticket from north Dulwich to London Bridge (?712 pa) and have claimed the paltry sum of ?3 in 2015, I gave up as at 71p a time it's barely worth it

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Can't see why anyone would be keen for TFL to take > over London's entire suburban rail network.... > > Take a look how they run the bus services... It > would be a complete disaster.. > > DulwichFox. What's wrong with the buses? As an admittedly infrequent user I find them excellent?

mikeb Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > @sjsl, not sure it is possible to effectively > object to this now - isn't it a done deal? > > (btw, I agree with you. A CPZ tends to reduce > total parking area and is only effective where a > substantial amount of parking is from > non-residents. No-one in their right mind would > drive through Dulwich Village in the morning to > park and ride at North Dulwich) I walk to North Dulwich daily and in the evenings there's a few station users who get into cars parked nearby.

Well if neither of us have actually witnessed this particular box junction then it's academic! And it's digressing from the fact that the vast majority of box junctions are reasonable. And cynical as I am, I doubt that they're used as revenue streams. Otherwise they'd be all over the place. I've almost been caught out on box junctions in the past but it is easy to avoid, and if you do get fined you're unlikely to repeat the error.

How did traffic fill the other side? It sounds like everyone was ignoring it so it became unusable?

Penguin68 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The point was that the box was so large, and the > timing of the lights so quick, that it wasn't > possible to clear the box. 2 Police cars were also > caught by this. And, please note, the box junction > was changed because it was seen as being > unreasonable. The fact that 2 police cars were caught is irrelevant. The timing of the lights and the size of the box is completely irrelevant. The fact that 4,472 drivers entered a box when they could not get out of the other side is relevant. Why did they go into the box when they could see they couldn't get out on the other side?

Brilliant! 4,472 drivers who for some reason entered the box without checking to see if they could get out the other side. "The Highway Code states drivers should only enter a yellow box if their exit is clear, or blocked only by oncoming traffic if they want to turn right. " How hard is that rule to follow?

Penguin68 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The issue is that enforcement of 'reasonable' laws > (OK, matter of definition) is one thing, but where > local authorities engineer the roads and > enforcement to drive a revenue stream (in London > this has certainly happened with some box > junctions and short traffic light cycles) then > 'break the law and you pay the price' doesn't look > so compelling. An area of considerable problem is > the extension of bus lanes to only a car's length > before a permitted left turn - knowing that any > early lane adjustment is a technical infringement, > even where the only impact is to unblock traffic > not wishing to turn left. Local authorities can > create legal, but wholly unreasonable, road > topologies which then become nice little earners. > And, in many cases, do. So why do some people seem to be especially prone to being caught out, whilst others sail through their lives without getting a single ticket? Most people only get caught out once! And on box junctions, please; if you can't see a way out of it, don't go into it. No excuse unless you get deliberately cut up in one.

As mulumbu says report to police (failing to stop or report a road traffic accident) asap. This will help you in any claim you make.

?5 single from East Dulwich/Forest Hill to Gatwick if you book in advance (obviously no flexibility).

Even hard drug addictions like heroin can be beaten by a change in environment http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/21/health/vietnam-heroin-disrupting-addiction/ "Astonishingly, only 5% of the men who returned home after becoming addicted in Vietnam relapsed within a year. Just 12% relapsed, even briefly, within three years. It was astonishing because, on average, 78% of those admitted for heroin use had been in treatment at least once before, according to the Department of Health and Human Services."

It's difficult driving anywhere in London. Unusually for me I drove to North London over the weekend, you really have to keep your wits around you with the ever-changing road layouts, nearly got caught out myself a few times.

Further back (about 500 yards) there is a junction with a big green sign on the left showing the way to Dulwich/Nunhead Then there is the straight on only arrow on the traffic light. There are thousands of those around the country, so it's a well established road sign. You'd be challenging on that basis. Just out of interest how likely is it that you'll make the same mistake again?

The traffic lights do have a straight on only arrow (white on blue background). Been there at least 5 years. And the road has a one way arrow on it too.

http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,996690

Could you fold it in half and tie it together with some string to get it under 180cm?

It's a mess. My office is in the City, and I walk down to North Dulwich station to get a train to London Bridge and walk across. I pay ?712 for a yearly season ticket from North Dulwich to London Bridge. Because it's rail only, I can use it to Blackfriars, London Bridge, Cannon Street, Charing Cross, Vauxhall, City Thameslink and Waterloo East. That also gives me a 1/3 off off-peak tube fares and rail fares across the SE. And any railcard for ?10 rather than ?30. If I wanted to use the bus and tube, then I would need a zone 1-2 card for ?1296 Still with me? So I save around ?800 a year, althogh ?584 at a minimum.

We all make mistakes, but that figure suggests that many more people are wilfully ignoring traffic regulations. Or have forgotten their driving lessons.

My mathematics suggest that they will pick this up for you? 200cm is their max size and your mattress is 200cm?

Morrissey. I find his voice very irritating.

Is ?65 if you pay within 14 days. I presume you only get caught once in a lifetime, since it's easy to avoid when you realise the consequence.

There is no limit on what you can bring back as long as it's for personal use or if you plan to give it away. HMRC do give advisory limits (i.e. if you bring more than the advisory limit they may ask you questions) https://www.gov.uk/duty-free-goods/arrivals-from-eu-countries

Loz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Lowlander Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > It's a bus station, not a garage; so it is a > road > > (restricted to buses, so don't go driving there > > either or they'll fine you!) > > The Road Traffic Act 1988 defines a ?road? as "in > relation to England and Wales, means any highway > and any other road to which the public has access, > and includes bridges over which a road passes". > > I reckon it worth a try as a part of an argument. I see your point. But would you employ the same argument if it were a fire station / ambulance station?

Salsaboy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The way I understand box junctions, if you enter > it with the expectation that the traffic ahead of > you will move and thus make space for you, you can > appeal it. As Loz says above, the offence occurs > when you enter the marked area, not once you are > in it. That's wrong. You're not allowed to stop in a yellow box (unless turning right). The only way to do that is if you can see enough space on the other side. The whole point of a yellow box is to keep a clear area, which is also why you find them outside fire station and ambulance depots.