When is turning left - not turning left
Discussion
My Uncle (a Barrister if that means anything) got a set of photos in the post. My suspicion is that unless he wants to go down the BoR route - he has a problem.
This is not about speed - its about turning left (or not) at a junction.
Not sure where this is - other than in London - but the "offence" was spotted by CCTV - so the photos are the only evidence against him (or to be more accurate - his wife)
Wifey turned left out of a Junction (has to) - but then immediately did a u-turn round the bollards and island that are placed there to prevent people turning right across the road.
Now - how do I add a photo?????
Picture 1: http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c83/NugentS/pic1.j
Picture 2: http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c83/NugentS/pic3.j
Any comments anyone - the offense charged is not following the direction sign (which was to turn left). The photos indictate that she did turn left - but then immediately did a 180.
Sean
BTW the second photo - the top left of the photo where you can just see a lampost and some lines in the road is I believe the very edge of the 1st photo at the edge of the bellmouth.
>> Edited by NugentS on Friday 16th December 18:27
This is not about speed - its about turning left (or not) at a junction.
Not sure where this is - other than in London - but the "offence" was spotted by CCTV - so the photos are the only evidence against him (or to be more accurate - his wife)
Wifey turned left out of a Junction (has to) - but then immediately did a u-turn round the bollards and island that are placed there to prevent people turning right across the road.
Now - how do I add a photo?????
Picture 1: http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c83/NugentS/pic1.j
Picture 2: http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c83/NugentS/pic3.j
Any comments anyone - the offense charged is not following the direction sign (which was to turn left). The photos indictate that she did turn left - but then immediately did a 180.
Sean
BTW the second photo - the top left of the photo where you can just see a lampost and some lines in the road is I believe the very edge of the 1st photo at the edge of the bellmouth.
>> Edited by NugentS on Friday 16th December 18:27
First thing I notice - cant read the number plate so how did they ID?
Secondly, whats actually wrong with the manouvre? Surely if you want to change direction and do so safely its allowed?
Finally. What kind of society are we living in where people are being paid to prosecute for this kind of thing? I mean just how empty must your life be to want to do this? Absolutely unbelievable.
Secondly, whats actually wrong with the manouvre? Surely if you want to change direction and do so safely its allowed?
Finally. What kind of society are we living in where people are being paid to prosecute for this kind of thing? I mean just how empty must your life be to want to do this? Absolutely unbelievable.
I do this regulary at a cross junction, where the council (Doncaster) have for some reason (no one has any idea) decided to stop people turning right, so they have to travel an extra several mile to get to where they want to. I go past, then do a U turn. Never been court, but there are no signs to say no U turn, and no solid line in the road. The manouver is safe aswell.
If she has not transgressed any signage to not do a u turn there (she obeyed the non turn right), then what the hell are they doing her for? Maybe a wheel crossed that line that looks like a bus lane on the second photo? Who knows?
If she has not transgressed any signage to not do a u turn there (she obeyed the non turn right), then what the hell are they doing her for? Maybe a wheel crossed that line that looks like a bus lane on the second photo? Who knows?
It doesn't look like a solid white line that she has crossed.
My understanding is that if its a 'no U-turn sign' then it would have to be placed between the junction she came out of and the end of the island. There is a no u turn sign in Aldersgate Street which I don't think you breach if you perform a 3 point turn.
Find out the exact location and if its anywhere near me I'll go and check it out.
Its a shame they don't use cameras like these for doing buses that breach the yellow box junction rule.
Scott
My understanding is that if its a 'no U-turn sign' then it would have to be placed between the junction she came out of and the end of the island. There is a no u turn sign in Aldersgate Street which I don't think you breach if you perform a 3 point turn.
Find out the exact location and if its anywhere near me I'll go and check it out.
Its a shame they don't use cameras like these for doing buses that breach the yellow box junction rule.
Scott
There's a similar section on High Street Ken. Traffic flowing North up Wrights Lane is obliged to turn left, but often then hooks round to u-turn.
The main problem with this (certainly this evening) is that there is a filter turning right into Wrights Lane which is merrily abused by the 3-poitn right turners. I had four cars cut across me as I tried to get of HSK this evening (including one that overtook on the exit of the minor road onto the major one!)
it's ok if traffic travels a little way (just a few car lengths) along the road before executing the u-turn. It is when they do it as a sinlge manouevre that things get hairy for other traffic.
From the photos, it looks like the vehicle didn't do much (any?) driving off to the left, which might define the turn as not being to the left. Don't know. Will have a look for you.
The main problem with this (certainly this evening) is that there is a filter turning right into Wrights Lane which is merrily abused by the 3-poitn right turners. I had four cars cut across me as I tried to get of HSK this evening (including one that overtook on the exit of the minor road onto the major one!)
it's ok if traffic travels a little way (just a few car lengths) along the road before executing the u-turn. It is when they do it as a sinlge manouevre that things get hairy for other traffic.
From the photos, it looks like the vehicle didn't do much (any?) driving off to the left, which might define the turn as not being to the left. Don't know. Will have a look for you.
only thing stikes me is that it is the same camera used for both pics so I assume the camera must have followed her manouvre from begining to end and there is only 10 seconds time elapsed between the pics.
Might be worth asking for the entire video in case there's something on there but TBH isn't that a solid white line she's crossing in the 2nd pic.
Might be worth asking for the entire video in case there's something on there but TBH isn't that a solid white line she's crossing in the 2nd pic.
She did follow the direction sign - and once the way was clear (ie where the bollards and concrete stop), she performed a presumably legal U-turn (any no-uturn signs?).
Don't see what relevance the solid white line has if thats not the offence listed. Besides, can't you cross solid white lines for turning?
Don't see what relevance the solid white line has if thats not the offence listed. Besides, can't you cross solid white lines for turning?
I reckon there should be an outright ban, on anything to do with government and video cameras. I'm fed up with the 
spying on people.
Edited to add;
I also recon they should be banned from placing unwarranted obstacles on Her Majestys Highways.
Sod it, let's just have a ban on government.
Further edited to add;
I've got it......
Let's have a breathing tax for civil servants.
>> Edited by dilbert on Sunday 18th December 01:21
spying on people. Edited to add;
I also recon they should be banned from placing unwarranted obstacles on Her Majestys Highways.
Sod it, let's just have a ban on government.
Further edited to add;
I've got it......
Let's have a breathing tax for civil servants.
>> Edited by dilbert on Sunday 18th December 01:21
"WHEN IS TURNING LEFT - NOT TURNING LEFT?" - when it is turning right
My guess is they are going for not following the no right turn. They would claim that your wife turned right. Albeit with a left kink, but they will say it was one continous maneourve with the left kink being necessary due to the bollard. I think they have got a point but I can't see it sticking. The "right turn" argument is subjective, the NIP should have been sent within 14 days to the registered keeper and how did they ID the car without manipulating the evidence?
>> Edited by bluepolarbear on Saturday 17th December 09:11
My guess is they are going for not following the no right turn. They would claim that your wife turned right. Albeit with a left kink, but they will say it was one continous maneourve with the left kink being necessary due to the bollard. I think they have got a point but I can't see it sticking. The "right turn" argument is subjective, the NIP should have been sent within 14 days to the registered keeper and how did they ID the car without manipulating the evidence?
>> Edited by bluepolarbear on Saturday 17th December 09:11
deeps said:
I had no idea they study cctv for petty motoring offences. Glad I don't live in a city! What is the punishment for this, or should I say how much do they want?
History shows that time and again one technology or law is used / introduced for one thing and then exploited and used by the powers that by
CCTV used to make the streets safer is routinely used for traffic offences particular no right turns, U turns and Parking
ANPR will be used to monitor speed
Anti social driving law used for speeding
ID Cards will be used to monitor, control and infrige on your rights to move and do things that you freely choose to do.
Tend to agree with BPB (0910)
The requirement to make a left turn would be, I presume, be signed with diagram 609 TSGD 2002 "vehicle traffic must turn ahead in the direction indicated by the arrow". Would seem that the close proximatey of the right turn means she failed to conform. As such the offence is failing to conform to Traffic Sign and as a result NOIP, if not stopped at the time, has to be served on Reg Keeper or driver withion 14 days.
dvd
The requirement to make a left turn would be, I presume, be signed with diagram 609 TSGD 2002 "vehicle traffic must turn ahead in the direction indicated by the arrow". Would seem that the close proximatey of the right turn means she failed to conform. As such the offence is failing to conform to Traffic Sign and as a result NOIP, if not stopped at the time, has to be served on Reg Keeper or driver withion 14 days.
dvd
As a Barrister his time is very valuable (which is why he's got you chasing round for info). Everyone does this kind of thing and most times you get away with and sometimes you don't. There are special rules in London that allow CCTV images to be used for detection of such offences (including parking in busways etc), so best NOT to repeat the manoeuvre when in London.
Why doesn't he (or his wife) just pay the penalty and move on?
>> Edited by deva link on Saturday 17th December 21:59
Why doesn't he (or his wife) just pay the penalty and move on?
>> Edited by deva link on Saturday 17th December 21:59
deva link said:
As a Barrister his time is very valuable (which is why he's got you chasing round for info). Everyone does this kind of thing and most times you get away with and sometimes you don't. There are special rules in London that allow CCTV images to be used for detection of such offences (including parking in busways etc), so best NOT to repeat the manoeuvre when in London.
Why doesn't he (or his wife) just pay the penalty and move on?
>> Edited by deva link on Saturday 17th December 21:59
I think cos he is a little hacked of with TPTB and is starting to "spoil for a fight"
DVD - its a fixed penalty - no NIP as its apparently not a criminal offense (no points). And you got the offense (as specified) exactly right. No Court - just an escalating fine with the "debt" registered somewhere and then along come the Bailifs.......
Sean
trackdemon said:
First thing I notice - cant read the number plate so how did they ID?
Secondly, whats actually wrong with the manouvre? Surely if you want to change direction and do so safely its allowed?
Finally. What kind of society are we living in where people are being paid to prosecute for this kind of thing? I mean just how empty must your life be to want to do this? Absolutely unbelievable.
There are two more photos - but they didn't add anything to the discussion - so I didn't post them. One was a closeup on the car showing the number.
Oh - the form went to the registered keeper - and says that they are liable - not the driver??????
Sean
>> Edited by NugentS on Saturday 17th December 22:34
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff