Penalty Charge Notice – Fight or Pay?

…collective wisdom has spoken. Just thought I’d see if the oracle agreed with my opinions, not this time.

Mistake made. I pay.

Children’s faces will be saved.

Baby robins?

so long as the signs are big enough they should be ok 😉

I shall sleep soundly. 😀

In all seriousness I had a similar thing happen to me in Islington a few years ago. There was a car parked close to the entrance point of the narrow junction. A few people tried to go through and ended up hitting the kerb, scuffing wheels etc. i went through the middle.

Anyway, i challenged the PCN, went all the way to appeal. I won the appeal as I went back to the same junction and demonstrated that with a parked car close to the entrance, the entrance was not sufficently clear to enable vehicles to clear the junction.

Amazingly Islington were able to challenge the appeal! (mere mortals are not allowed) they lost again and were ordered to modify the junction and pay me reasonable costs. I have yet to see either!

…hmmm, my violation was in Islington too. Unfortunately no parked cars restricting access.

Scenario Two – the OP is pulled by the copper and is deeply apologetic, explaining that he’s lost/new to the area/made a mistake but didn’t put anyone’s life at risk.

It’s nothing to do with being lost or new to the area (even if that was the case) he drove somewhere that even from the shitty photo we can tell he’s not allowed to go. Pretty sure that part of the driving test is being able to SEE and pay attention to road signs. If you did that on your test you’d fail instantly.

OP – We all do dumb stuff. I got 300 euros of traffic fines in 12 minutes in Florence once.

I once passed a cyclist, and chose to give them plenty of room by passing the wrong side of a centre island bollard with a tiny blue arrow. Otherwise empty road, except for a white car about 500 metres ahead.

Strangely, the white car waited at a roundabout, then as I got closer I realised it was a copper. I pulled up behind, and instead of indicating I should follow him, he got out and proceeded to give me a ticking off, whilst we blocked the entrance to the roundabout and several other cars drove around us, entering the roundabout on the wrong side of another blue arrowed bollard :d

However, if I’d got caught on camera I would just be holding my hands up unless there was a vehicle blocking my route.

Scenario Two – the OP is pulled by the copper and is deeply apologetic, explaining that he’s lost/new to the area/made a mistake but didn’t put anyone’s life at risk.

Copper explains the error, outlines why it could have been dangerous and the OP accepts this and promises to be more vigilant in future. OP goes on his way and everyone is safe and happy.

It’s shades of grey folks. It’s called NUANCE.

But there was no copper. It was a camera with no ability to discriminate between intentional and accidental.

geetee1972 – Member

Which is my point – the use of cameras to impose fines with impunity (impunity that is to the nuanced situation I described above) cannot be argued to serve the public good 100% of the time.

Cool. Will you stand up in court on my behalf then? I Got an SP30 from a Gatso – I was doing 58 in a 50 on an empty dual carriageway at 22:30 on a Sunday evening. I wasn’t hurting anyone and all the children were in bed. 😆

By the way, I paid up as soon as I received the notice. It was a fair cop.

To OP where is that location as I want to google map it …

I want to know why they designed it that way … weird.

here it is

So it’s just there for emergency vehicles to pass through the width restriction, basically.

the particular road feature appears to be a trap for money-making.

It seems pretty well marked and clear to me. I’m not seeing how it’s a ‘trap’. If the road signs were missing or badly labelled then I’d agree, but there’s two road signs, hatching on the entrance, a bloody big white arrow or the road where you should go, a different coloured block-paved road surface, an illuminated bollard, and just in case all that isn’t enough, a warning sign that it’s enforced by a camera.

I can’t see any justification, or indeed any rational reason at all why you’d ever be driving slowly (as you say) across that section of ‘road’. The only reason I can think to be there is if you’d come round the bend at the speed of sound and straight-lined the corner through the wider part. And if you were, gods help you if someone coming the other way ever has the same idea.

It was a camera with no ability to discriminate between intentional and accidental.

I’m not clear as to which is the ‘oh, that’s ok, never mind then’ scenario here.

If it was intentional then it’s a reckless disregard for the traffic signs (which is what it says on the ticket, natch). If it’s unintentional then it’s almost certainly Driving Without Due Care and Attention and I’d seriously suggest you look into advanced driving lessons. I’d be -very- wary of trying that as a defence for this reason alone; it’s really clearly marked.

I’d love to hear what your excuse / reasoning behind it was. Makes no sense to me.

Cougar, I’ve already conceeded above, I am happy to except I made a mistake.

As for what it is; it looks like it’s there to restrict the width of vehicles. There’s a 6’6″ maximum width sign and posts in place to prevent the passage of wider vehicles. The island is presumably to allow the passage of emergency vehicles as someone else suggested.

You don’t appear to be 6’6″ wide, so you’ve not gone down a lane you shouldn’t have. On that grounds is it petty? Perhaps. Do you have a leg to stand on? No. Sorry.

whippersnapper – Member

here it is

Thanks for the link.

Okay now I see … it’s a 20mph zone in the housing area.

hhhmmm … I guess the council has added extra traffic calming measures there to ensure drivers absolutely comply with the speed limit after turning in from the main road.

So if you are not familiar with that area there is a chance you will miss that if you do not look at the traffic signs properly.

If that’s your car then just pay the £65 fine … I doubt you will have grounds for dispute as there are traffic signs all over including Zebra crossing on the main road etc … it’s an indication you are entering a high pedestrian zone or might be entering a housing zone.

My understanding is that the traffic calming measure is there because of the block of flats just immediately after turning in from the main road. The council could have put it further down the road to give you more time to read the traffic signs but then they would miss out covering for those new flats.

Well on the bright side at least you have not scored “100 points” by mowing down some pedestrians.

p/s: I could easily make the same mistake if not careful …

Cougar, I’ve already conceeded above, I am happy to except I made a mistake.

“Accept.” And, sure, I think that’s the better of the two options. I’ve certainly made enough over the years. (-:

It’s a similar argument to slowly creeping through red lights on deserted roads at 4am. The lights are to control traffic flow and if it’s very clear that there’s nothing coming then they serve little purpose(*). But if you get caught running one even then, you’ll get prosecuted for it.

(* – personally I think it’s daft and they should set a lot of them to fixed amber in all directions at off-peak times, but that’s a whole other conversation.)

I guess the council has added extra traffic calming measures there to ensure drivers absolutely comply with the speed limit after turning in from the main road.

I don’t think that’s the case, or at least if it is, that’s a secondary measure. It’s to keep HGVs and such out the residential area.

“Accept”

ah bugger, and another mistake…

fine will be paid tomorrow. Lesson learned.

geetee1972 –
the use of cameras to impose fines with impunity

I have to agree that cameras are not an answer to road safety. As stated a ‘copper’ can use discretion in such instances. However, discretion does not automatically mean you should be ‘let off’.

The OP hasn’t really shown any understanding of what they did, how they ended up there or that they have improved their driving skills to protect the public from dangerous driving.

A fine is the wrong penalty here. It would be better to be 3 straight points on the license. At least the accumulation of points serves as a reminder to be more observant.

Cougar –
It’s a similar argument to slowly creeping through red lights on deserted roads at 4am. The lights are to control traffic flow and if it’s very clear that there’s nothing coming then they serve little purpose(*). But if you get caught running one even then, you’ll get prosecuted for it.

Even stupider still, if you pass through a red light to allow an emergency vehicle through then you have also broken the law and can be prosecuted. It would be the Courts discretion to accept that you were doing so ‘properly’.

Sure. But in that instance you’ve got two contradictory laws in place (I think) – isn’t it also illegal to fail to yield to emergency services? I’d have to check.

No it’s not illeagal to not yeild to an emergency vehicle in the UK. In the US I believe it is.

I think you may be confusing with failing to act as directed by a policeman.

mk1fan – Member

Even stupider still, if you pass through a red light to allow an emergency vehicle through then you have also broken the law and can be prosecuted. It would be the Courts discretion to accept that you were doing so ‘properly’.

That would be harsh on the driver …

mk1fan – Member

No it’s not illeagal to not yeild to an emergency vehicle in the UK

That would be stupid …

isn’t it also illegal to fail to yield to emergency services? I’d have to check.

That doesn’t sound logical as yielding might actually slow the emergency vehicle down.

don simon – Member

That doesn’t sound logical as yielding actually might slow the emergency vehicle down.

How can that slow down the emergency vehicle? Explain.

For example, if all lanes are jammed (no room for another vehicle to go through) and you are stopping at the red light and emergency vehicle needs to go through how would it be wrong to simply drive to the left passed the stop line to let it through?

If I understand yield to mean getting out of the way, then if the vehicle comes behind and you yield, you could simply be creating an extra obstacle whereas continuing until there is a safe place for said vehicle to over take.

don simon – Member

If I understand yield to mean getting out of the way, then if the vehicle comes behind and you yield, you could simply be creating an extra obstacle whereas continuing until there is a safe place for said vehicle to over take.

How could you yield if the emergency vehicle is just right up your backside and you have no way to go except driving pass the stop line to the left/side to let it through? Say it is safe to drive pass the stop line to the left.

What is a minor inconvenient to other drivers where someone in the emergency vehicle needed urgent medical attention?

🙄

You’ve lost me now… 😆

Scenario Two – the OP is pulled by the copper and is deeply apologetic, explaining that he’s lost/new to the area/made a mistake but didn’t put anyone’s life at risk.

Net cost to the taxpayer – about £100.

Camera is there to save money. Just pay the fine, at least you’re not getting points.

unless you reversed into the traffic Island.

Looks like a crappy bit of traffic calming to be fair, but I’d expect that from councilists.

don simon – Member

You’ve lost me now…

😆 I was not referring to the OP … but say in the normal traffic lights.

Nevermind …

Nevermind …

I think you’re actually agreeing with me in that yielding at the sound of the siren is not always the best course of action, getting out of the bloody way, is. And that might mean accelerating, not stopping.
But yeah, nevermind…

I am saying that the particular road feature appears to be a trap for money-making.

There’s no way that’s a trap. There may as well be a sign saying don’t come through this way, tigers will eat you!

I’d say suck it up, and get yourself a copy of the highway code while you’re at it.

don simon – Member

I think you’re actually agreeing with me in that yielding at the sound of the siren is not always the best course of action, getting out of the bloody way, is. And that might mean accelerating, not stopping.
But yeah, nevermind..

Actually it’s the other way round … I would drive to the side to let the emergency vehicle through if that means driving/creeping passed the red light to the side of the road or simply position my car to the left passing the stop line. All this by taking into consideration I am not putting myself in danger of whatever traffic there is.

And that might mean accelerating, not stopping.

If you accelerate (not creeping pass) pass the red light you would in fact be putting yourself in danger because you are ahead of the emergency vehicle and other drivers may not know your intention. Creeping pass give other drivers a chance to see you …

I’m not simply talking about in a red light zone, this I think is the confuddling bit. 😀

don simon – Member

I’m not simply talking about in a red light zone, this I think is the confuddling bit.

😆 Bloody hell … wasted my time typing … 😆

Guess we might be talking about very different situation here …

😀
Now get yourself on to possibly the funniest thread, EVER!

don simon – Member

Now get yourself on to possibly the funniest thread, EVER!

Stone him for trying to be funny … 😆