Fine for going through a no entry
Discussion
My daughter has just received this fine for going through a no entry in a car park, she said she became confused in the car park and ended up going through, she admits she did it etc but panicked, she caused no issues to anyone else.
Does anyone have any ideas as to the best way to appeal it, ie go through the standard appeals process, pleading that she became confused and being contrite or is there another way, I occasionally hear of "Pepipoo", would that help or us it just a case of appealing via the normal way, or just sucking it up.
She is a student with limited funds and of course £65 is a shed load of money for an extremely minor transgression.
Thanks in advance.
Does anyone have any ideas as to the best way to appeal it, ie go through the standard appeals process, pleading that she became confused and being contrite or is there another way, I occasionally hear of "Pepipoo", would that help or us it just a case of appealing via the normal way, or just sucking it up.
She is a student with limited funds and of course £65 is a shed load of money for an extremely minor transgression.
Thanks in advance.
snake_oil said:
London, England
https://goo.gl/maps/Ljb9YnmgE7v
Yes it was there, she came down the ramp and should have gone round to her right but carried on, not seeing the road markings pointing to go round to the right, she saw the no entry signs by the green fencing so went into the green fenced area, hoping there was a way out there but there wasn't so came back out, waited a few moments and then drove through the no entry signs; which are clear, she should have gone back the way that she came.https://goo.gl/maps/Ljb9YnmgE7v
That's fine it is clear so she will just have to pay.
The local authority fines are usually hard to appeal, they generally won't accept mitigating circumstances unless it's something catastrophic.
The only routes for appeal are either "procedural impropriety", such as a problem with the paperwork (very rare), or some problem with the signage or the traffic order in place that enables them to issue the penalty, and that requires a lot of time researching and technical knowledge.
My only suggestion is to pay it early because these can escalate very quickly to a £400 enforcement visit. The London authorities don't mess about as it's a massive revenue earner for them.
The only routes for appeal are either "procedural impropriety", such as a problem with the paperwork (very rare), or some problem with the signage or the traffic order in place that enables them to issue the penalty, and that requires a lot of time researching and technical knowledge.
My only suggestion is to pay it early because these can escalate very quickly to a £400 enforcement visit. The London authorities don't mess about as it's a massive revenue earner for them.
HTP99 said:
My daughter has just received this fine for going through a no entry in a car park, she said she became confused in the car park and ended up going through, she admits she did it etc but panicked, she caused no issues to anyone else.
Does anyone have any ideas as to the best way to appeal it, ie go through the standard appeals process, pleading that she became confused and being contrite or is there another way, I occasionally hear of "Pepipoo", would that help or us it just a case of appealing via the normal way, or just sucking it up.
She is a student with limited funds and of course £65 is a shed load of money for an extremely minor transgression.
Thanks in advance.
At the risk of upsetting the OP, I’ll make a general point about Nanny State vs Millennials vs owning your own actions. Does anyone have any ideas as to the best way to appeal it, ie go through the standard appeals process, pleading that she became confused and being contrite or is there another way, I occasionally hear of "Pepipoo", would that help or us it just a case of appealing via the normal way, or just sucking it up.
She is a student with limited funds and of course £65 is a shed load of money for an extremely minor transgression.
Thanks in advance.
There seems to be a lot of people complaining that the youth of today don’t take ownership of what they do, but isn't it equally true that parents of today are overly defensive of their offspring?
Using this case as an example, we have a situation that’s not disputed at all. The young driver admits going through a No Entry sign and yet there’s a request to appeal it. One of the defences being that it didn’t inconvenience anyone. That seems to be a frequent defence and I don’t understand it, as applied to all other laws it seems to imply that without a victim there should be no crime. Surely that can’t work in practice as it would be anarchy, apart from the odd inconvenient death or injury?
I know it’s not great for the OP that his child has made a mistake, but often there are good lessons to be learned and lessons learned when young are far better than those made when older.
graylag said:
HTP99 said:
My daughter has just received this fine for going through a no entry in a car park, she said she became confused in the car park and ended up going through, she admits she did it etc but panicked, she caused no issues to anyone else.
Does anyone have any ideas as to the best way to appeal it, ie go through the standard appeals process, pleading that she became confused and being contrite or is there another way, I occasionally hear of "Pepipoo", would that help or us it just a case of appealing via the normal way, or just sucking it up.
She is a student with limited funds and of course £65 is a shed load of money for an extremely minor transgression.
Thanks in advance.
At the risk of upsetting the OP, I’ll make a general point about Nanny State vs Millennials vs owning your own actions. Does anyone have any ideas as to the best way to appeal it, ie go through the standard appeals process, pleading that she became confused and being contrite or is there another way, I occasionally hear of "Pepipoo", would that help or us it just a case of appealing via the normal way, or just sucking it up.
She is a student with limited funds and of course £65 is a shed load of money for an extremely minor transgression.
Thanks in advance.
There seems to be a lot of people complaining that the youth of today don’t take ownership of what they do, but isn't it equally true that parents of today are overly defensive of their offspring?
Using this case as an example, we have a situation that’s not disputed at all. The young driver admits going through a No Entry sign and yet there’s a request to appeal it. One of the defences being that it didn’t inconvenience anyone. That seems to be a frequent defence and I don’t understand it, as applied to all other laws it seems to imply that without a victim there should be no crime. Surely that can’t work in practice as it would be anarchy, apart from the odd inconvenient death or injury?
I know it’s not great for the OP that his child has made a mistake, but often there are good lessons to be learned and lessons learned when young are far better than those made when older.
My wife had a parking ticket a few years ago, she insisted that she had parked within the lines but didn't take a photo, it was appealed, we won, however she had parked badly (photos were sent with the decision), so whoever was doing the appeals that day was obviously having a good day.
HTP99 said:
She did wrong and both of us have admitted that, however if there is a way not to pay or get out of it then I'm sure anyone would have a go, I have asked, it seems she is banged to rights so therefore it will be paid.
My wife had a parking ticket a few years ago, she insisted that she had parked within the lines but didn't take a photo, it was appealed, we won, however she had parked badly (photos were sent with the decision), so whoever was doing the appeals that day was obviously having a good day.
My comment wasn’t aimed directly at you, it’s just that it allowed for a more general comment. So no offence intended. My wife had a parking ticket a few years ago, she insisted that she had parked within the lines but didn't take a photo, it was appealed, we won, however she had parked badly (photos were sent with the decision), so whoever was doing the appeals that day was obviously having a good day.
I honestly remember two instances where my Dad reckoned he could get me out of something I did wrong but his words were “you’ll learn more by accepting the punishment by than by me getting you out of it”. I never repeated either mistake. One was stupidly fast speeding as new driver (over 60 in a 30), one was a bit of vandalism as a young teen. However, I also did a few other things that weren’t great as a youngster and got away with them, courtesy of a clever and experienced Dad. I repeated those mistakes later in life and wish I’d suffered earlier.
The signs seem pretty clear. No left turn, no entry sign, no entry writing on road.
However if you/she is one of those people who
Think it is so unfair
Not my fault
How was I supposed to know?
Don’t take responsibility.
They are all out to get us
..then appeal (using those grounds).
No harm done? That seems to be an entrance allowing a wide sweep for delivery vehicles turning in. The space is for that, and presumably so that an HGV does not get stuck with its arse hanging out onto a main road when it comes across a car going for the quick exit.
However if you/she is one of those people who
Think it is so unfair
Not my fault
How was I supposed to know?
Don’t take responsibility.
They are all out to get us
..then appeal (using those grounds).
No harm done? That seems to be an entrance allowing a wide sweep for delivery vehicles turning in. The space is for that, and presumably so that an HGV does not get stuck with its arse hanging out onto a main road when it comes across a car going for the quick exit.
HTP99 said:
snake_oil said:
London, England
https://goo.gl/maps/Ljb9YnmgE7v
Yes it was there, she came down the ramp and should have gone round to her right but carried on, not seeing the road markings pointing to go round to the right, she saw the no entry signs by the green fencing so went into the green fenced area, hoping there was a way out there but there wasn't so came back out, waited a few moments and then drove through the no entry signs; which are clear, she should have gone back the way that she came.https://goo.gl/maps/Ljb9YnmgE7v
That's fine it is clear so she will just have to pay.
I’d be going down the appeal road. I appeal EVERYTHING. Up here in Enfield, there is even a comment box on the appeals website that explains, ‘whilst there are only x number of statutory legal challenges’ we may consider exceptional circumstances. It includes parking tickets falling off the dash etc. My latest was for a box junction (stopping). I explained I hadn’t expected my pupil to do an emergency stop in the middle of a box junction with a clear road ahead (dash cam video supplied)
I’d be going for the last MOT
angle on the cheeky red one. My daughter felt the suspension wasn’t quite right and rather than turning, decided to go straight ahead. Naturally, you’ve had the suspension components checked and all is now good. Safety first! Won’t do it again etc...If you don’t want to go down the PCJ road though, just appeal on the grounds you’ve stated (missing out the ‘poor student’ part though) I made a mistake, realised my errors and won’t do it again. Worst case? PCN is frozen until appeal is looked at and then pay the reduced amount if refused.
Make sure you appeal (online) within 14 days of the PCN notice. This is the bit that pisses me off and why I appeal everything. All your PCN tells you (on the front) is PAY within 14 days and PC is reduced. (Nothing about appeals)
If you actually read the other side, it also tells you all about it
What you’re ‘ threatened’ with....
The bit they have to tell you about..
In smaller letters and mixed up in the other stuff about death/disaster/bailiffs COURT etc...
Edited by TVR1 on Saturday 3rd November 20:10
OP
As Steve has said, there could be "procedural impropriety", and this is usually in the small print.Case are won on this mistake
Copy all sides of the certificate, with personla info redacted
Load it onto a photohosting site ( info is available on pepipoo and post it in the Council thread
The lads there will soon let you know if you can run with it
The words 'may' and 'will' on the reverse could give you the golden ticket. After all if the council cant read the law correctly why should you suffer for they schoolboy errors?
As Steve has said, there could be "procedural impropriety", and this is usually in the small print.Case are won on this mistake
Copy all sides of the certificate, with personla info redacted
Load it onto a photohosting site ( info is available on pepipoo and post it in the Council thread
The lads there will soon let you know if you can run with it
The words 'may' and 'will' on the reverse could give you the golden ticket. After all if the council cant read the law correctly why should you suffer for they schoolboy errors?
TVR1 said:
My latest was for a box junction (stopping). I explained I hadn’t expected my pupil to do an emergency stop in the middle of a box junction with a clear road ahead (dash cam video supplied)
But stopping in a box junction isn't illegal (as long as the road ahead is clear).Going through a no-entry is a bit more difficult to get out of - unless of course you claim you are Jeremy Corbyn.
No ideas for a name said:
TVR1 said:
My latest was for a box junction (stopping). I explained I hadn’t expected my pupil to do an emergency stop in the middle of a box junction with a clear road ahead (dash cam video supplied)
But stopping in a box junction isn't illegal (as long as the road ahead is clear).Going through a no-entry is a bit more difficult to get out of - unless of course you claim you are Jeremy Corbyn.
We could discuss all night about ‘when’ the offence of a box junction is completed but as with the camera operator that issued the PCN, I went down the easier route of appeal.
It’s the same as road priority,
For sure, I/my pupil may very well have priority but is it better to suck it up and give way? Or have the knowledge and satisfaction that I was RIGHT! Whilst exchanging insurance details because of the head on collision?
Edited by TVR1 on Saturday 3rd November 20:36
TVR1 said:
No ideas for a name said:
TVR1 said:
My latest was for a box junction (stopping). I explained I hadn’t expected my pupil to do an emergency stop in the middle of a box junction with a clear road ahead (dash cam video supplied)
But stopping in a box junction isn't illegal (as long as the road ahead is clear).Going through a no-entry is a bit more difficult to get out of - unless of course you claim you are Jeremy Corbyn.
Highway code (which is advice) doesn't match with the law...
Traffic Signs and Regulations, Schedule 9 Part 7 Section 11 - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedu...
The YBJ marking conveys the prohibition that a person must not cause a vehicle to enter the box junction so that the vehicle has to stop within the box junction due to the presence of stationary vehicles.
My bold.
But of course, looks like the OP doesn't have a get out for their contravention though. As far as I can tell, it is 'only' a PCN - non endorsable, so no points. Only hope is to check if the signage is legal - is there a matching TRO for instance?
No ideas for a name said:
TVR1 said:
No ideas for a name said:
TVR1 said:
My latest was for a box junction (stopping). I explained I hadn’t expected my pupil to do an emergency stop in the middle of a box junction with a clear road ahead (dash cam video supplied)
But stopping in a box junction isn't illegal (as long as the road ahead is clear).Going through a no-entry is a bit more difficult to get out of - unless of course you claim you are Jeremy Corbyn.
Highway code (which is advice) doesn't match with the law...
Traffic Signs and Regulations, Schedule 9 Part 7 Section 11 - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedu...
The YBJ marking conveys the prohibition that a person must not cause a vehicle to enter the box junction so that the vehicle has to stop within the box junction due to the presence of stationary vehicles.
My bold.
But of course, looks like the OP doesn't have a get out for their contravention though. As far as I can tell, it is 'only' a PCN - non endorsable, so no points. Only hope is to check if the signage is legal - is there a matching TRO for instance?
Appeal the f
ker, every time. Durzel said:
What a ludicrous number of signs though.Yes, to someone experienced a glance is probably enough, but surely no-one could think that that signage comes even close to being sensible.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff