Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi we got a PCN from TFL as our car slipped into the box junction, pictures show us going in and waiting with tail half in the box. We challenged this as there are two box junctions positioned close together between sets of traffic lights outside the Peckham bus garage, but moreover the fact that they are there not to help filter traffic but actually causes problems and for accummulating revenue for the TFL, e.g there is no real right hand turn, the traffic lights are between each box change so increases chance of being caught in them, therefore they are not appropriately placed. We have a hearing tomorrow but wondering if anyone else has had experience of successfully appealing or being fined for going into the boxes. There seems to be ample room for the buses to enter the garage and I do not know why they don't just have a keep clear sign in place or just wait a few minutes like other vehicles, why do buses have special priority? Failing that I was going to challenge them on the amount ?130 which is disproportionate to the offence?
Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/89142-box-junction-appealschallenges/
Share on other sites

You won't win by saying it's unfair and money making or the fine is too big. You might win if you appeal based on law.


Box junction law is complex. There are a couple of websites out there that cover most of the bases -


http://www.appealnow.com/parking-tickets/yellow-box-junctions/

http://yellowboxjunction.co.uk

https://moneyboxjunction.wordpress.com/


They will give you a good idea on how you might appeal. It's mostly around the fact that the offence occurs when you enter the box, so at that point do you have any clear exit to the box.


A user here called fredricketts I think successfully appealed on a yellow box ticket here. He's not been active here for a couple of years, but sending him an email might work. http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?20,135592,708635#msg-708635


In the case of the bus station yellow box, I suspect (but I don't think this has ever been proven) that it is an illegal box junction. A box junction has the be at the junction of two roads - this is at the junction of a road and a bus garage. It would all depend on whether that entrance to the bus station is legally a road.

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.

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.

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.


Not quite. If there is a space to exit when you enter, you have a good chance of appeal. So, if someone cuts you up, then you have a good excuse. But if you enter hoping the exit will clear, you won't have much success in appealing.


Bizarrely, on two lane roads, if the other lane is clear and you stop, people have successfully appealed as they were considered to have chosen to stop, rather than were forced to stop (as per the letter of the law)!

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?

I dont think we can rely on arguing against the fact we did enter and stop in the box although momentarily and partially. Hoping more to argue on the position, purpose therefore validity or legality of the box junctions. Tfl argue that they sought consultation through proper channels. Meaningless to me as its proof of functionality thats important, confusion to public, inadequate traffic management and only serving purpose of lining their purses increaing their revenue is worth challenging. Have checked some of the sites suggested by Loz and tips like what constitutes a road is useful to know. Thanks. The point of whether it would be same argument for an ambulance or firestation is irrelevant as its not, its outside a bus station/garage operated by TFL.
12.9 Yellow box markings may be used outsidepolice, fire, ambulance stations or hospitals only where there is an access road forming a junction with the main road. Where vehicles exit directly onto the carriageway, a KEEP CLEAR marking to diagram1026 or a KEEP CLEAR marking to diagram1027.1 (varied to omit the word ?SCHOOL?) shouldbe usedd.
Good point nashoi and worth noting.TFL objected to our challenge sending a CD of recording our vehicle along with a catalogue of papers defending their position aggressively advising us to pay the now increased charge of ?130. We have tribunal hearing tomorrow for our case to be heard. Therefore useful to arm ourselves with information for our defence.
Attended hearing today and lost. Made our representation with info gathered. His response was basically a contravention has occurred heres the fine to pay. Regarding the box junction rules he said verbatim the authorities can do what they like and put box junction where they like, that cant be used as a defence. I suggest that the location of them results in problems fines profitting TFL which therefore should be removed maybe local MP would like to take up the cause. Disappointed to say the least lost faith in system completely bolstering fat cats.

I kinda have some sympathy as I've been caught out in the same place. It doesn't help that the flow of traffic through there is so volatile, and people seem to drive quite aggressively.


Nevertheless, sounds like you were at fault and to be honest I'm not surprised your appeal was rejected. "Bolstering fat cats?" Who are the fat cats? ?130 might sound like a lot, but doesn't go very far when you think about the whole process of enforcement, issuing fines, appeal, hearing, etc.

The hearing was at London Tribunals. Fat cats i refer to TFL. If they didnt have box junctions in such places to catch people there would be less PCNs and subsequent hearings. Accepted we were caught in the box no doubt about that but the man (judge?)supporting authorities stating they can do what they like and put box junction where they like i didnt accept and i queried thd legality of this. He declined to comment on this.

Here's a freedom of Information request made by a person remarked on above back in 2010


https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/yellow_box_junction_size


I noted


"A total of 3,048 PCNs were issued in the Peckham/High St/Peckham Bus

station for contraventions between 5 January 2010 until 21 August 2010."

You can still appeal the adjudicators decision if, as it seems in this case according to what you say, "the interests of justice require a review" as he/she has ignored the requirements under the Road Traffic Act.


http://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/ruc/your-hearing/making-application-review-adjudicators-decision

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • In what way? Maybe it just felt more intelligent and considered coming directly after Question Time, which was a barely watchable bun fight.
    • Yes, all this. Totally Sephiroth. The electorate wants to see transformation overnight. That's not possible. But what is possible is leading with the right comms strategy, which isn't cutting through. As I've said before, messaging matters more now than policy, that's the only way to bring the electorate with you. And I worry that that's how Reform's going to get into power.  And the media LOVES Reform. 
    • “There was an excellent discussion on Newscast last night between the BBC Political Editor, the director of the IFS and the director of More In Common - all highly intelligent people with no party political agenda ” I would call this “generous”   Labour should never have made that tax promise because, as with - duh - Brexit, it’s pretending the real world doesn’t exist now. I blame Labour in no small part for this delusion. But the electorate need to cop on as well.  They think they can have everything they want without responsibilities, costs or attachments. The media encourage this  Labour do need to raise taxes. The country needs it.  Now, exactly how it’s done remains to be seen. But if people are just going to go around going “la la laffer curve. Liars! String em up! Vote someone else” then they just aren’t serious people reckoning with the problem yes Labour are more than a year into their term, but after 14 years of what the Tories  did? Whoever takes over, has a major problem 
    • Messaging, messaging, messaging. That's all it boils down to. There are only so many fiscal policies out there, and they're there for the taking, no matter which party you're in. I hate to say it, but Farage gets it right every time. Even when Reform reneges on fiscal policy, it does it with enough confidence and candidness that no one is wringing their hands. Instead, they're quietly admired for their pragmatism. Strangely, it's exactly the same as Labour has done, with its manifesto reverse on income tax, but it's going to bomb.  Blaming the Tories / Brexit / Covid / Putin ... none of it washes with the public anymore  - it wants to be sold a vision of the future, not reminded of the disasters of the past. Labour put itself on the back foot with its 'the tories fucked it all up' stance right at the beginning of its tenure.  All Lammy had to do (as with Reeves and Raynor etc) was say 'mea culpa. We've made a mistake, we'll fix it. Sorry guys, we're on it'. But instead it's 'nothing to see here / it's someone else's fault / I was buying a suit / hadn't been briefed yet'.  And, of course, the press smells blood, which never helps.  Oh! And Reeve's speech on Wednesday was so drab and predictable that even the journalists at the press conference couldn't really be arsed to come up with any challenging questions. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...