PCN Notice Greenford / otter road yellow box

dannyrst

Nodding_Donkey wrote: »

No, that would have allowed the car behind to cross the junction. People that switch lanes going through box junctions to take up someone else's exit space are as guilty as the op in my opinion.

If someone were to switch lanes and cause someone to stop in a yellow hatched box, I'd suspect that would be grounds to appeal (assuming there was no indication the person was going to do that when you entered the box).

As for the OP, I personally can't see a reason to even bother wasting your time appealing.

Edwood_Woodwood

Head_The_Ball wrote: »

The van ahead of you didn't "suddenly stop". It stopped because the traffic in front of it was stationary. You should have either seen that or anticipated it.

You shouldn't have entered the box junction when you did. You should have waited until there was a clear one car length space for you to drive into.

I see no grounds for appeal.

Absolutely not the case, there is grounds for appeal.

Rule 174 states, You MUST NOT enter the box until your exit road or lane is clear.

This particular road is clearly not a single carriageway, there are two lanes (one a bus lane that can obviously be used during certain hours by any motorist).

Changing lanes is perfectly legal, even whilst passing through a box junction.

There was ample space for two vehicles in the OP's road ahead, in the right hand lane, but both were taken up by one vehicle.

You appear to be under the mistaken belief that the OP only had the option of the lane he was originally in.

Incorrect.

Put it this way, had the car in the right hand lane moved forward and freed up the gap for another vehicle, and the OP went into it, are you telling us he had then committed a different traffic violation?

:rotfl:

Edwood_Woodwood

Browntoa wrote: »

You are always meant to check your exit is clear before proceeding , you sound have waited until there was clear space the other side before proceeding

There was clear space, there are two lanes not one.

The OP was not obliged to use just one lane, he was using the (two lane) road ahead of him.

Edwood_Woodwood

Nodding_Donkey wrote: »

No, that would have allowed the car behind to cross the junction. People that switch lanes going through box junctions to take up someone else's exit space are as guilty as the op in my opinion.

Unfortunately, your opinion matters not, the law does though.

And it is perfectly legal to do so.

wealdroam

Edwood_Woodwood wrote: »

Absolutely not the case, there is grounds for appeal.

Rule 174 states, You MUST NOT enter the box until your exit road or lane is clear.

This particular road is clearly not a single carriageway, there are two lanes (one a bus lane that can obviously be used during certain hours by any motorist).

Changing lanes is perfectly legal, even whilst passing through a box junction.

There was ample space for two vehicles in the OP's road ahead, in the right hand lane, but both were taken up by one vehicle.

You appear to be under the mistaken belief that the OP only had the option of the lane he was originally in.

Incorrect.

Put it this way, had the car in the right hand lane moved forward and freed up the gap for another vehicle, and the OP went into it, are you telling us he had then committed a different traffic violation?

All that stuff about using either lane is kind of missing the point.
As you yourself said: "Rule 174 states, You MUST NOT enter the box until your exit road or lane is clear. "

The point being that the OP's exit was not clear before he entered the box.

If it was, why did he stop?

It really is that simple.

AdrianC

Edwood_Woodwood wrote: »

There was ample space for two vehicles in the OP's road ahead, in the right hand lane, but both were taken up by one vehicle.

You're looking at a different video to me.

The OP's BMW enters the box at 0:20, before the van's out of it. The car next to him is half alongside as they enter, front wing to rear wing. When the OP slows, half way through the box, they're side by side. The car in front, in the RH lane, is level with the car in front of the van, and stationary. It hasn't moved before the camera zooms in on the OP. It's barely clear of the OP's front bumper by the time it stops. The OP then tucks forward, tight to the back of the van at 0:31.

Yes, the car in the RH lane could move forward a bit, but not enough to give a car length clear before the yellow paint starts, so the OP would still be hung out to dry, just now blocking both lanes instead of just one.

B'sides, it's one of the basic advanced driving tenets that you DON'T tuck up too close, but leave yourself room to change lane in the event the car in front doesn't move off for whatever reason. Never heard the phrase "Tyres touching tarmac"? Always stop with enough of a gap so you can see the point at which the vehicle in front's tyres meet the road surface.

Edwood_Woodwood

wealdroam wrote: »

All that stuff about using either lane is kind of missing the point.
As you yourself said: "Rule 174 states, You MUST NOT enter the box until your exit road or lane is clear. "

The point being that the OP's exit was not clear before he entered the box.

If it was, why did he stop?

It really is that simple.

I'm sorry but it is you missing the point.


Do not be preoccupied with just viewing the footage as one single lane.


The road ahead has two lanes, both open to the OP, regardless of which lane he may have been in on approach.


He is still perfectly entitled to change lanes at any time, it is not prohibited.


When he proceeds there is ample room in the right hand lane for two cars, but one car takes up both spaces.


The road in front is not at "full capacity" for an offence to have been committed.


"Full capacity" (of the road ahead not just one lane) is what the appeal's process will determine.

Edwood_Woodwood

AdrianC wrote: »

You're looking at a different video to me.

Yes, the car in the RH lane could move forward a bit, but not enough to give a car length clear before the yellow paint starts, so the OP would still be hung out to dry, just now blocking both lanes instead of just one.

Right at the beginning of the video it shows the capacity available beyond the box junction and it is quite evident that two cars can move into the right hand lane quite comfortably.


Even at the end one can clearly see that the last car in the right hand lane can move forward quite some distance, enough for another car at least.


As for blocking both lanes! Umm, there would be a box junction behind so no car should be approaching anyway!


Further, he would not be blocking anyway had the car moved forward as they should have done.

wealdroam

Edwood_Woodwood wrote: »

The road ahead has two lanes, both open to the OP, regardless of which lane he may have been in on approach.

He is still perfectly entitled to change lanes at any time, it is not prohibited.

I agree, but there is no opportunity for him to do so.
He is not entitled to drive into the side of the vehicle already in the RH lane.
I won't write it all out again because AdrianC has already done that well:

AdrianC wrote: »

The OP's BMW enters the box at 0:20, before the van's out of it. The car next to him is half alongside as they enter, front wing to rear wing. When the OP slows, half way through the box, they're side by side. The car in front, in the RH lane, is level with the car in front of the van, and stationary. It hasn't moved before the camera zooms in on the OP. It's barely clear of the OP's front bumper by the time it stops. The OP then tucks forward, tight to the back of the van at 0:31.

Edwood_Woodwood wrote: »

When he proceeds there is ample room in the right hand lane for two cars, but one car takes up both spaces.

That may be your opinion, but I'm inclined to agree with AdrianC where he says:

AdrianC wrote: »

Yes, the car in the RH lane could move forward a bit, but not enough to give a car length clear before the yellow paint starts, so the OP would still be hung out to dry, just now blocking both lanes instead of just one.

Car_54

The law simply says "... no person shall 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." [The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002, Schedule 19[2(7(i))]

The OP did stop due to the presence of stationary vehicles, so guilty.

There are exemptions, noe of which apply.