Unfair PCN or pay it and move on?
Discussion
From the lights, I turned in the left direction and then straightened and carried on straight ahead. It is necessary to turn left first at the two roads are not opposite each other; they do not even overlap.
In the first photo (I can't get it straight, apologies!!), you can see a no right turn sign and a turn left blue arrow (under the traffic lights). I turned left.
In photo 2 you can see the route I took in the Black Polo (the bus is stationary!!)
When I did this there were just two signs in photo one. Today, one week later there are all sorts of cameras, turn left arrows and assorted additional signs!! These were not there at the time.
Did I turn illegally?
The wording below states (Proceeding in the wrong direction)
Can I argue I turned Left and complied with the signs and then turned right! It appears they are saying I was in contravention of the turn left only sign and i went straight ahead.
At what point am I deemed to have turned left, and complied with the sign, before I turned right??
Thoughts, please. Is it worth an appeal and if so, on what grounds?
In the first photo (I can't get it straight, apologies!!), you can see a no right turn sign and a turn left blue arrow (under the traffic lights). I turned left.
In photo 2 you can see the route I took in the Black Polo (the bus is stationary!!)
When I did this there were just two signs in photo one. Today, one week later there are all sorts of cameras, turn left arrows and assorted additional signs!! These were not there at the time.
Did I turn illegally?
The wording below states (Proceeding in the wrong direction)
Can I argue I turned Left and complied with the signs and then turned right! It appears they are saying I was in contravention of the turn left only sign and i went straight ahead.
At what point am I deemed to have turned left, and complied with the sign, before I turned right??
Thoughts, please. Is it worth an appeal and if so, on what grounds?
You’re stuffed, I reckon...
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/traff...
Under “signs giving orders”, blue arrow pointing left is a positive instruction to turn left. At the junction you were at, this is clearly meant to prevent you from going straight over (as you did), to ensure traffic continues to flow freely.
As an aside, the bus is clearly moving (slowly), waiting for the exit to clear so they’re not stopped on the cross hatched lines.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/traff...
Under “signs giving orders”, blue arrow pointing left is a positive instruction to turn left. At the junction you were at, this is clearly meant to prevent you from going straight over (as you did), to ensure traffic continues to flow freely.
As an aside, the bus is clearly moving (slowly), waiting for the exit to clear so they’re not stopped on the cross hatched lines.
Cylon2007 said:
You didn't tun left, you went straight on, there was a 'slight' kink to the left as the straight ahead lane is not quite in line but you did not tun left.
Is the argument, therefore, how left do I need to turn?Nowhere does it say I cannot proceed straight on. A left turn was made.
I did not go straight and I did not turn right. The assumption can only be drawn that if I did not go right or straight, I had to have gone left initially?
Turfy said:
Is the argument, therefore, how left do I need to turn?
Nowhere does it say I cannot proceed straight on. A left turn was made.
I did not go straight and I did not turn right. The assumption can only be drawn that if I did not go right or straight, I had to have gone left initially?
I think you're spliting hairs here. You went straight on, I don't think that the fact you turned the steering wheel a bit discounts you from the fact you went straight on. Nowhere does it say I cannot proceed straight on. A left turn was made.
I did not go straight and I did not turn right. The assumption can only be drawn that if I did not go right or straight, I had to have gone left initially?
DanL said:
You’re stuffed, I reckon...
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/traff...
Under “signs giving orders”, blue arrow pointing left is a positive instruction to turn left. At the junction you were at, this is clearly meant to prevent you from going straight over (as you did), to ensure traffic continues to flow freely.
As an aside, the bus is clearly moving (slowly), waiting for the exit to clear so they’re not stopped on the cross hatched lines.
Thank you for your response.https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/traff...
Under “signs giving orders”, blue arrow pointing left is a positive instruction to turn left. At the junction you were at, this is clearly meant to prevent you from going straight over (as you did), to ensure traffic continues to flow freely.
As an aside, the bus is clearly moving (slowly), waiting for the exit to clear so they’re not stopped on the cross hatched lines.
Initially, there was only one straight white arrow on a blue background ("turn left") at the time of the offence (seen on the opposite traffic light in photo one)
There are now there are 2 more of the "turn left ahead" signs added (after the alleged offence took place) before the junction/traffic light.
Is there a reason they have added these new signs, do they mean the same thing?
I have been doing this same thing for 20+ years and never an issue. Suddenly, one week after the photo, new signs and a fine!
Turfy said:
From the lights, I turned in the left direction and then straightened and carried on straight ahead. It is necessary to turn left first at the two roads are not opposite each other; they do not even overlap.
In the first photo (I can't get it straight, apologies!!), you can see a no right turn sign and a turn left blue arrow (under the traffic lights). I turned left.
In photo 2 you can see the route I took in the Black Polo (the bus is stationary!!)
When I did this there were just two signs in photo one. Today, one week later there are all sorts of cameras, turn left arrows and assorted additional signs!! These were not there at the time.
Did I turn illegally?
The wording below states (Proceeding in the wrong direction)
Can I argue I turned Left and complied with the signs and then turned right! It appears they are saying I was in contravention of the turn left only sign and i went straight ahead.
At what point am I deemed to have turned left, and complied with the sign, before I turned right??
Thoughts, please. Is it worth an appeal and if so, on what grounds?
Was this the view you had? And now it has different signage?In the first photo (I can't get it straight, apologies!!), you can see a no right turn sign and a turn left blue arrow (under the traffic lights). I turned left.
In photo 2 you can see the route I took in the Black Polo (the bus is stationary!!)
When I did this there were just two signs in photo one. Today, one week later there are all sorts of cameras, turn left arrows and assorted additional signs!! These were not there at the time.
Did I turn illegally?
The wording below states (Proceeding in the wrong direction)
Can I argue I turned Left and complied with the signs and then turned right! It appears they are saying I was in contravention of the turn left only sign and i went straight ahead.
At what point am I deemed to have turned left, and complied with the sign, before I turned right??
Thoughts, please. Is it worth an appeal and if so, on what grounds?
Turfy said:
From the lights, I turned in the left direction and then straightened and carried on straight ahead. It is necessary to turn left first at the two roads are not opposite each other; they do not even overlap.
If I've understood correctly your argument is that you DID turn left and you DIDN'T go straight ahead?If so was there another road going straight ahead that you could possibly have taken? if there isn't that would suggest that the road you took was the one that the signs are asking people NOT to take (in which case you're stuffed....)
Hope that makes sense
pavarotti1980 said:
Turfy said:
From the lights, I turned in the left direction and then straightened and carried on straight ahead. It is necessary to turn left first at the two roads are not opposite each other; they do not even overlap.
In the first photo (I can't get it straight, apologies!!), you can see a no right turn sign and a turn left blue arrow (under the traffic lights). I turned left.
In photo 2 you can see the route I took in the Black Polo (the bus is stationary!!)
When I did this there were just two signs in photo one. Today, one week later there are all sorts of cameras, turn left arrows and assorted additional signs!! These were not there at the time.
Did I turn illegally?
The wording below states (Proceeding in the wrong direction)
Can I argue I turned Left and complied with the signs and then turned right! It appears they are saying I was in contravention of the turn left only sign and i went straight ahead.
At what point am I deemed to have turned left, and complied with the sign, before I turned right??
Thoughts, please. Is it worth an appeal and if so, on what grounds?
Was this the view you had? And now it has different signage?In the first photo (I can't get it straight, apologies!!), you can see a no right turn sign and a turn left blue arrow (under the traffic lights). I turned left.
In photo 2 you can see the route I took in the Black Polo (the bus is stationary!!)
When I did this there were just two signs in photo one. Today, one week later there are all sorts of cameras, turn left arrows and assorted additional signs!! These were not there at the time.
Did I turn illegally?
The wording below states (Proceeding in the wrong direction)
Can I argue I turned Left and complied with the signs and then turned right! It appears they are saying I was in contravention of the turn left only sign and i went straight ahead.
At what point am I deemed to have turned left, and complied with the sign, before I turned right??
Thoughts, please. Is it worth an appeal and if so, on what grounds?
Now you have a new sign, turn left ahead too, 20m before the lights.
I'd have a go at arguing that if it was me (but I am an argumentative type..)
The "turn left" signs are clearly there to prevent drivers turning right (there are also "no right turn" signs for added clarity). You didn't turn right (obv), you turned left and then immediately right.
As the cross-hatched area covers the other side of the road (in front of the bus), it's safe to assume that its OK to turn right into the road you went into.
My question would be - how "staggered" does a junction have to be to be classed as a "left then right", rather than just a "straigh-over" manouvre. Your argument might also include the fact that the signage was improved after your alleged offence, which suggests it was inadequate at the date of your alleged offence.
BTW - you state that the bus wasn't moving, but it is clearly in a different position on each of the photos - just saying....
The "turn left" signs are clearly there to prevent drivers turning right (there are also "no right turn" signs for added clarity). You didn't turn right (obv), you turned left and then immediately right.
As the cross-hatched area covers the other side of the road (in front of the bus), it's safe to assume that its OK to turn right into the road you went into.
My question would be - how "staggered" does a junction have to be to be classed as a "left then right", rather than just a "straigh-over" manouvre. Your argument might also include the fact that the signage was improved after your alleged offence, which suggests it was inadequate at the date of your alleged offence.
BTW - you state that the bus wasn't moving, but it is clearly in a different position on each of the photos - just saying....
Pay it and move on. It's a left turn only, not a sign that gives you the option to argue the semantics as to whether you turned slightly left and then carried straight on. The left turn only sign is there because the traffic to your left that will be passing through the junction and will exit the junction to your right. They will not be expecting a car to travel in your direction and to cross their paths whilst they are on a green light. It's there for safety.
Just pay up and take the extra time to loop the roundabout on the A316. If you don't, you'll continue getting fines and you'll end up t-boning someone who is navigating the junction correctly or you'll be t-boned by someone who is using the junction correctly.
Just pay up and take the extra time to loop the roundabout on the A316. If you don't, you'll continue getting fines and you'll end up t-boning someone who is navigating the junction correctly or you'll be t-boned by someone who is using the junction correctly.
Turfy said:
From memory the signs attached and below the lights (nearest lights) are new. The sign on the far lights has always been there.
Now you have a new sign, turn left ahead too, 20m before the lights.
That StreetView is from April 2018 so they must have changed again.Now you have a new sign, turn left ahead too, 20m before the lights.
Reckon its a take on the chin moment
x9wfm said:
They put extra signs up because they noticed a load of idiots weren't seeing them 
It's kinda the crux of my appeal and the other bits too as above.I'll draw it out and appeal as far as I can and if I lose, I'll pay them £65.
That junction is a little gold mine for the council. I've TURNED LEFT there twice today and seen 3 car's TURN LEFT, then IMMEDIATELY RIGHT
Robatr0n said:
Pay it and move on. It's a left turn only, not a sign that gives you the option to argue the semantics as to whether you turned slightly left and then carried straight on. .......
Can you (or anyone else) explain where I can find out how far a driver has to travel after turning, before being legally allowed to make another turn??NGee said:
Robatr0n said:
Pay it and move on. It's a left turn only, not a sign that gives you the option to argue the semantics as to whether you turned slightly left and then carried straight on. .......
Can you (or anyone else) explain where I can find out how far a driver has to travel after turning, before being legally allowed to make another turn??The secondary sign on the junction opposite makes it obvious you shouldn't be entering Church Road from Clarence Street.
NGee said:
Robatr0n said:
Pay it and move on. It's a left turn only, not a sign that gives you the option to argue the semantics as to whether you turned slightly left and then carried straight on. .......
Can you (or anyone else) explain where I can find out how far a driver has to travel after turning, before being legally allowed to make another turn??Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff