Just wondering. ticked this morning for using a solid lined chevroned area to avoid being shunted in the arse in my car. The highway code says that these areas must be avoided except in an emergency. My protests to this effect were ignored. The PC could not see what was going on as he was behind a van. I had to accept his ticket as I couldn't risk the court deal but am now wondering if I can protest. I think the PC doing the job was slightly wrong in his procedure and ie I was told what I had done wrong until I was actually handed my ticket. I aso think he noted the wrong location. I was not told despite asking why not saying anything may harm my defence. He couldn't explain, only that it might. The Pc hwo stopped me was rather rude to say the least so i am bunging in a formal complaint and the one who wrote the ticket was very unhelpful and bored with the whole idea.
Any idea which may help. I suspect that the whole process is automated now and the only way that I avoid the ticket and fine is to go to court which I just cannot afford to do, even if I win so any proven help would be good.
Chat Forum
Highway code/legal experts here?
-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
I can't see how you can dispute it without going to court - post ticket or not.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Solid white line means "do not cross", emergency or not.
Posted 2 years ago # -
So if someone dumps a car by them all traffic could be sat there for days?
Posted 2 years ago # -
Solid white line means "do not cross", emergency or not.
Does it? How about the motorway hard shoulder then? I wouldn't think twice about driving into a solid chevron'd area to avoid an accident, whether right or wrong in law.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Solid white line means "do not cross", emergency or not.
Wrong.
Posted 2 years ago # -
130
Areas of white diagonal stripes or chevrons painted on the road. These are to separate traffic lanes or to protect traffic turning right.
* if the area is bordered by a broken white line, you should not enter the area unless it is necessary and you can see that it is safe to do so
* if the area is marked with chevrons and bordered by solid white lines you MUST NOT enter it except in an emergency[Laws MT(E&W)R regs 5, 9, 10 & 16, MT(S)R regs 4, 8, 9 & 14, RTA sect 36 & TSRGD 10(1)]
Looks pretty clear. Unless it was an emergency you had no need to enter the chevroned area.
Unless you can prove it was an emergency then there is no point in going to court. Witnesses etc required
Posted 2 years ago # -
Well, there's a difference there as the hard shoulder is an edge line and the chevron area is a centre line.
However, http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070306 rule 130 does suggest the copper was wrong in this case, but you'd have to argue it in court.
Posted 2 years ago # -
wheres smee when you need him ?
Posted 2 years ago # -
OK, first thing is to seek decent legal advice. Make an appointment to see a solicitor.
Issues that you raise that may assist you are that the wrong location may have been noted, as if the location he has recorded does not have the chevroned area, you can't have a received a ticket for driving in it, can you?? To prove this would need a sitting in front of the magistrates though, and this means not sending the ticket off. You'd then get a summons for the magistrates for the area that you got ticketed (not your local magistrates), and all involved would be required to attend.
You'd be surprised the number of cases that fall down because the person has opted to go to magistrates, and the officer involved either doesn't attend, or somewhere along the evidence chain something is lacking.
Can work both ways though, if you got to mags and plead not guilty, but are found guilty, then they'll often go for the top end of the punishment scale. Back to what I said first, make an appointment with a solicitor and seek proper legal advice, go to solicitor armed with photos of the actual location and the location that the copper has put on the ticket.
Posted 2 years ago # -
It was an emergency, rule 130 of the highway code. Also the officer who pulled me couldn't see me until I was pulling off. They made a whole bunch of cock ups such as not telling why I was stopped until after giving me the ticket. Actually they still haven't I had to make the assumption. Main issue is that I just can't afford the solicitor even let alone risk anything else. Regarding prof of this how can I ? I was alone in rush hour traffic. the emergency was the **** who pushed me off the ffing road onto the chevrons. He then pissed off . My only potential witness was the copper who booked me and he couldn't see through a van. Guess I am stuck with it which aggrieves me as I was doing everything right.Any links to any arseing anti fuzz groups who can tell me how to prove poor practice?
Posted 2 years ago # -
How was it an emergency?
Posted 2 years ago # -
If you make a complaint about the cop make sure you give the exact same statement each time, if you are unsure tell them you are usure DO NOT TRY TO REMEMBER WHAT HAPPENED AND GET IT WRONG, the way they prove a case against you is keep coming back for statements and let you make subtle changes, then when the case is heard they put it to you that you have given x amount of different versions and basically make you look like a muppet. Best of luck
Posted 2 years ago # -
It sounds like this might have been where two lanes merged into one, and another driver was alongside you? If so, it may be a bit less clear cut as one of you should have slowed to give way to the other before it got so narrow you had to cross the lines.
On the other hand, if you were at the back of a slow moving queue and got out the way of someone behind who was going too fast, then you just have to prove that.
Posted 2 years ago # -
If its just a standard fine, £60, pay it - accept that next time you should've argued the toss to a greater degree and made him realise that you may have gone to court on a point of principle.
If its a fine and points - is it worth losing a day to go to court, with possibly the same result? And a solicitor will relieve you of far more...
Its your call.
TBH I would've stood my ground if I was convinced I did right (I did once a few years ago arguing about 'undertaking', and the copper realised that I was not going 'quietly' and he could see hassle for nothing).
Posted 2 years ago # -
I'm sure we all want to see the junction in question on google earth before making a decision.
Write a polite letter explaining your objections and see what happens.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I don't think he has to prove there was an emergency, all he has to do is prove the copper couldn't see what was causing the emergency. Fighting it in court might be difficult without witnesses though. I agree, I'd never accept an FPN if I felt I was in the right, on principle. But what's done is done now. And yes, I've stood and argued with a copper until he had to admit he was wrong, after he'd searched my car after saying "do you want me to go over your car and find something wrong with it" and coming up with nothing.
Posted 2 years ago # -
If the copper has written the wrong location on the ticket then the whole ticket will be binned. Check it, if it is the wrong location write a letter and send the FPN into the FPN office (via special delivery) and take a copy of everything.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Is that common M-C?!
Posted 2 years ago # -
Yup, if they have written the wrong location, date, time etc then the ticket can be argued and it will be written off as invalid. It isn't where or when it happened so it's null and void!!
Posted 2 years ago # -
Oh and how we hate it when crims get off on "technicalities"!
Posted 2 years ago # -
And *most* of us would say that avoiding an accident would be classed as an emergency.
Posted 2 years ago # -
M_C - novel!
m_f - I'd say avoiding being hit was pretty much the definition of an emergency. What would you class as an emergency - asteroid impact?
Posted 2 years ago # -
Cynic-al LOL at your comment, you a criminal prosecutor?
Posted 2 years ago # -
No - civil litigator.
It just struck me as ironic that you see Daily Mail style posts that whine about criminals getting off on technicalities whereas it's encouraged if it's "one of our own" - no offence to OP personally
Posted 2 years ago # -
It just struck me as ironic that you see Daily Mail style posts that whine about criminals getting off on technicalities whereas it's encouraged if it's "one of our own"
Fairly normal protective behaviour, flawed, but normal, and in this case seems to be not a criminal getting had for doing the right thing!
Posted 2 years ago # -
TJ:
using a solid lined chevroned area to avoid being shunted in the arse in my car.
I'd say was enough of an emergency to warrant it, although obviously depends on the exact circumstances...in the case of "I'm not moving to let you in....well I'm coming in anyway" - that's probably not an emergency.
And if the Police didn't see the 'emergency' how are they in a position to judge?
Friend of mine got done for dangerous driving (or might have been without due care & attention), when a Police car saw him in the very final stages of an overtake manouevre, as they came round a corner ahead....they stopped him, he argued that it was a safe overtake, they gave hime a ticket & fine...
In the end him mum said that if he genuinely believed he was in the right, then he should take it to court. He represented himself, the two Policeman gave different accounts of what happened, whereas my mate gave a clear account of his manouevre including pics taken from the scene, diagrams etc. The judge told the police they had wasted his time & chucked it out....Posted 2 years ago # -
m_f - I'd say avoiding being hit was pretty much the definition of an emergency. What would you class as an emergency - asteroid impact?
I am with you - there are others (read TJ) that appear to be suggesting it isn't an emergency.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Notwithstanding the query over the location, if you are saying you went into it to prevent an accident, and the police couldn't see enough to say 'no you weren't/no he wasn't', then I would think you have a reasonable case. I'm not a lawyer though so ask one of them.
Posted 2 years ago # -
if you are saying you went into it to prevent an accident, and the police couldn't see enough to say 'no you weren't/no he wasn't', then I would think you have a reasonable case.
You would assume this to be the case - it isn't for you to prove you are innocent, it is for them to prove you are guilty.Taken to an extreme, someone stood over a dead body couldn't be charged with murder unless there was proof they actually did it, not just happen to be stood over the body when the plod sees them.
Posted 2 years ago # -
How was it an emergency?
TJ, are you delerious? He was doing it to avoid an accident! (By the sounds of it) If that's not an emergency I don't know what is!
I've done pretty much the same on a motorbike: Stopped at a pellican crossing, I heard the screech of tyres behind me and causgt a glipse of a slightly sideways transit van bearing down behind me. Luckily I was in gear and moved forewards into the people crossing as the van screeched to a halt exactly where my back wheel had been sitting. I did use some proper Anglo Saxon words on that occasion!
Posted 2 years ago # -
Rather than arguing now I'd say if the OP firmly and strongly believes he shouldn't have recieved the ticket, challenge it! Simple really.
Oh and cynic-al completely agree but hey ho!!!!Posted 2 years ago # -
Wrong location on the ticket - you are free as a bird.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Free Criminal Law advise
If what you say is right then it would appear you have not commited the offence. Your only option is to accept the ticket and penelty or fight it in court . To fight in court follow the directions on the ticket do not just ignore it. The police have six months to apply for a summons if they don't you win by default. if you get a summons respond saying you intend to plead not guilty the court will then list the case for trial. you need to indicate you require the officers to attend. Your evidence is you telling the magistrates what happened you will have to attend and give evidence on oath.
You may use a lawyer who will either charge by the hour circa £120+vat or agree a fixed fee I'd want about £400+vat.If you win you can expect to get about 1/3 of you bill refunded by the court .
The lawyer is going to do and say exactly what you would only hopefully with a few posher words and a bit more confidence. In truth the debate in the posts above gives you an idea of the issues you need to deal with; What happened ?why it was an emergency? why the officer could not have had a clear view? If there are defects in the ticket they should also be reflected in the charge you do need to set out your issues about that in advance as if you raise a technicality by surprise the prosecutor will ask for and get an adjournment to correct the charge or call more evidence.
If you lose you can expect the same points a higher fine and a costs order of about £200-£300.
You should be able to deal with this on your own. If you want a lawer go to a general criminal firm not Road Traffic Experts.Posted 2 years ago # -
TJ, are you delerious?
I assume that is a rhetorical question Posted 2 years ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
