Do I have grounds to appeal in court?

Sparx

Hello, before I explain the situation, here is an image of which I will be referring too in my post of were this 'incident' occurred..

h ttp://i48.tinypic.com/2vtwmj6.png
^ won't let me post links, remove the space between the H and T at the start

So here is a roundabout about 5 miles away from my home.. The ultimatum was I received a £60 fine and 3 points on my license for apparently "Parking on zig zags of a Zebra Crossing".. I don't know this area very well, however, the story goes like this:

I had just come off the roundabout above and came onto 'Durban Road'.. You see how the zig zags are about 5/6 car lengths, with the last 'zag' being the bus icon.. After I had come of the roundabout, I braked and stopped at the last zag were that bus icon is and was behind a car in the same position shown on the Google Maps image.. However this happened on Thursday and we have had inches of snow.. I don't know the area well and therefore knowing zebra crossings have zig-zags either side, but typically I have seen them be 2/3 car lenghts either length, however after 5/6 car lengths and at night time, visibility is reduced and the snow had obstructed my view of any road markings so to my knowledge I would of thought after so many car lengths I was clear of the zig zags..

I braked, stopped and shifted to gear 1, and let a passenger into my car as me and 2 friends were of to the cinema, now the moment I started to move again 2 cops in a 4x4 came off the roundabout and saw me move away, flashed there lights and pulled me over..

He asked if I had been to the ATM machine just of the roundabout (so obviously hasn't seen me or anyone else enter or exit my vehicle at a guess because he just saw me move away, at the most he saw my 2nd passenger get in who I just picked up).. And I said no, I just picked someone up.. But he said I was parked on zig zags and gave me a £60 fine and 3 points on my license (the only parking offence with points) ! Now, I only passed my driving test last month (2nd-Dec-09).. And obstruction of the snow has blocked my view of any road markings, however after looking up as well, I'm not sure if this is accurate.. But, the definition he used 'parked' is incorrect? I had braked and stopped my car, shifted to gear 1, not applied the hand brake and let my passenger in and moved off again - is this classed as parking? I did not turn off my engine, leave my car or have it un-attended or had my car in neutral.. Just stopped for a moment as if I was in a queue of traffic (not parked, in neutral gear or anything), let a passenger in then was driving off..?

Do I have grounds to appeal this in court? Either argue the case that the snow was obstructing my view of the road markings, or the fact I wasn't technically 'parked' ?


Thanks, sorry for the long post!

peter_the_piper

As far as I know stopping on any zig-zag line is an offence, I suggest you wait for a legal mind to look at this as maggie courts can be difficult. They will usually side with the BiB. If no help here post on Pepipoo.com as they have legally trained folk who will help.

bargepole

You can only "appeal" once you've been convicted in the Magistrates' Court, then you can apply to the Crown Court for an appeal hearing - which is essentially a re-run of the original trial - or you can appeal to the High Court by way of Case Stated, which you would do if you thought the Mags were wrong on points of law.

Before any of that happens, you currently have a fixed penalty notice, which means you can pay £60 and avoid court, or you can elect not to pay the fixed penalty, in which case there will be a trial at the Magistrates' in due course.

At the trial, you can either plead Not Guilty, and hope that the word of you and your witness will be believed over that of the officer; or, you can plead Guilty with mitigating circumstances (lines obscured by snow) and hope they are lenient.

Altarf

http://www.motorlawyers.co.uk/offences/pedestrian_crossing.htm - Just stopping to pick someone up isn't going to get you off.

Lack of knowledge of the variable length of zigzag lines isn't going to get you off.

Not being able to see the zigzags? Maybe, maybe not. If you took it to court the magistrates might take the view that you shouldn't have stopped so close to a zebra crossing unless you could be certain that you were not stopping on the zigzags (i.e. if you can't see them, don't stop), or they might be generous and accept your argument that you thought that you were past the end of them.

But the $64,000 question is what will the two cops in the 4x4 say. Will they agree that the zigzags were not visible, or will they say that they were? If it is the latter, you lose.

Sparx

bargepole wrote: »

You can only "appeal" once you've been convicted in the Magistrates' Court, then you can apply to the Crown Court for an appeal hearing - which is essentially a re-run of the original trial - or you can appeal to the High Court by way of Case Stated, which you would do if you thought the Mags were wrong on points of law.

Before any of that happens, you currently have a fixed penalty notice, which means you can pay £60 and avoid court, or you can elect not to pay the fixed penalty, in which case there will be a trial at the Magistrates' in due course.

At the trial, you can either plead Not Guilty, and hope that the word of you and your witness will be believed over that of the officer; or, you can plead Guilty with mitigating circumstances (lines obscured by snow) and hope they are lenient.

The FPN I was given on the payment slip has a tear-off part at the bottom 'Part 4' were you can request to be given a court hearing for the offence..


I'm still not convinced that it was classed as 'parked' and I could argue that? It's the same concept if I stopped there and was stationary for a few seconds in gear if for example the road was narrower and I had to let a car through before moving again, or if I was stopped at a red traffic light.. How is it any different? I wasn't parked technically, I was in gear, the engine was turned on, I didn't ever leave my car and it was never un-attended, I didn't apply the parking brake...

I just think it's quite unfair and unjustified for the time of day, lack of traffic/pedestrians about and that the zig zags there are so long, and I'm not a careless, reckless, selfish driver, I use my mirrors, I look for pedestrians, I don't speed, I was in the mind-set that I didn't intend to be in a dangerous position or be on zig zag lines, however I was caught out from the weather.. Along with the fact I still don't believe I was "parked"..

Sigh.

Sparx

intranix wrote: »

p.s. I really wouldnt bother going to court and arguing over having your handbrake applied, you'll just appear to be a smart !!!! and the judge will some down on you hard.

You should only ever take on the traffic police on specifics if you can afford a very good lawyer who is certain he can get you off. I doubt one could in this case, afterall you did stop, and someone got in your car. If you're saying you didnt park then you'd probably get done for careless driving instead, afterall you should have the handbrake applied if you're letting people in/out of your car.

I still think I'd have to of turned my engine off and left my car un-attended for it to be classed as parking wouldn't I? So I could not say I didn't have the hand brake on.. =/ I did still have my foot brake on so..

P.S. But yes, these traffic cops are severely harsh and complete !!!!!!!s..

Kay_Peel

Forget the word 'parked'. The offence is committed for stopping on the zig zags.

If the zig zag lines weren't visible then you may have a good reason not to pay the FPN and to elect for a hearing at the Magistrates Court.

Bear in mind that the officer will give evidence and he or she may say that the zig zag lines were visible to motorists. Also, the police vehicle may have been equipped with a camera or the officer may have taken a quick photo of the road markings with a digital camera/mobile phone. So be sure of your observations!

Having said that, if you are still adamant that the zig zag lines were obscured by snow then you should opt for a hearing rather than pay up and take the penalty point hit.

Sparx

Kay_Peel wrote: »

Forget the word 'parked'. The offence is committed for stopping on the zig zags.

The offence he has written on the FPN says "Park zig zag at zebra crossing" offence code 50071 ?

Kay_Peel

Sparx wrote: »

The offence he has written on the FPN says "Park zig zag at zebra crossing" offence code 50071 ?

Have a look at your highway code or have a good look at the Contravention of Pedestrian Crossing Regulations (Stationary Vehicles). You could even look at the case law on what constitutes 'parking'.

You have an idea of what constitutes 'parking' and it is the wrong idea. You weren't stopped in traffic and you hadn't stopped to allow pedestrians across - you had stopped to let a passenger alight from your car. That's enough to commit the offence. I wouldn't think about using this argument at all - so put it out of your mind.

You are saying that you knew that the zig zag lines were there and that you thought you had stopped in a place beyond the zig zags. You couldn't tell because the zig zags were obscured. If you are right, then this is your strongest defence. Stick with it because to bring up the question of whether you had 'parked' or not is just asking for trouble.

And if the officers say that they could see the zig zags then you're goosed.

Simple as that.

Coupon-mad

To the OP you could try posting your question on pepipoo.com here:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showforum=5

...but I think they will say the same as above. I agree with the others on here, the debate about what constitutes 'parking' and 'stopping' has been discussed on pepipoo before and is NOT a get-out-of-jail-free card. IMHO it's not worth pursuing that line of argument.

Also on pepipoo they are wary of advising anyone to take an FPN before a Magistrates Court, AFAIK, as there's every chance the Court will side with the Police. Even to the extent on whether snow obscured the zig-zags, it will be your word against a copper.

Perhaps better to pay this one and put it down to experience?