Fine for stopping in a box junction

user1977

prowla said:

user1977 said:

prowla said:

I think this is an unfair Catch-22 situation.

I think it's a situation where the driver needs to educate themselves about what the road markings mean.

Harsh, but every day's an education.

What’s harsh about it? It’s not as if the driver is reading this, are they?

prowla

Car_54 said:

prowla said:

Car_54 said:

prowla said:

user1977 said:

prowla said:

I think this is an unfair Catch-22 situation.

I think it's a situation where the driver needs to educate themselves about what the road markings mean.

Harsh, but every day's an education.

Maybe so, but the driver should have been educated about red lines and box junctions if he passed a UK test in the last 40-ish years.

That's not very helpful after the event, is it?

It might help if it prompts the driver to refresh his understanding of the law, before his next even

Ah - isn't hindsight a great thing.

prowla

Herzlos said:

Where was the car when the pedestrians blocked the path? You could try and argue that you were already in the box junction and had to stop for safety reasons, but I'm not sure if that'd be corroborated by the camera that caught you in the box.

The three original pictures and the ones sent with the rejection all show pedestrians in front of the vehicle.

I was wondering if that could be an option, but am looking for possible examples of that being a valid defence.

prowla

user1977 said:

prowla said:

user1977 said:

prowla said:

I think this is an unfair Catch-22 situation.

I think it's a situation where the driver needs to educate themselves about what the road markings mean.

Harsh, but every day's an education.

What’s harsh about it? It’s not as if the driver is reading this, are they?

Well, it's judgemental and not answering the question.

born_again

prowla said:

Herzlos said:

Where was the car when the pedestrians blocked the path? You could try and argue that you were already in the box junction and had to stop for safety reasons, but I'm not sure if that'd be corroborated by the camera that caught you in the box.

The three original pictures and the ones sent with the rejection all show pedestrians in front of the vehicle.

I was wondering if that could be an option, but am looking for possible examples of that being a valid defence.

To be fair no one here has seen them, which could have given a different perspective.

Car_54

OP, your friend will get better-qualified advice if he posts on ftla.uk, in the Civil Penalties section.

Okell

Herzlos said:

Where was the car when the pedestrians blocked the path? You could try and argue that you were already in the box junction and had to stop for safety reasons, but I'm not sure if that'd be corroborated by the camera that caught you in the box.

I may be mistaken but my understanding is that stopping in a yellow box is only an infringement if you have to stop because of the presence of stationary vehicles.  I know the Highway Code says you must not enter a box junction unless your exit is clear, but I don't think that that is strictly correct.

If I've understood the OP correctly, they didn't stop in the box junction because of stationary vehicles ahead of them, but because they were waiting for pedestrians to clear the bit of footpath that the OP wanted to drive over.

I would have thought that was OK and not a traffic offence - but I may be wrong - or may have misunderstood what the OP has said...

Okell

Car_54 said:

OP, your friend will get better-qualified advice if he posts on ftla.uk, in the Civil Penalties section.

Otherwise this ^^^

prowla

Car_54 said:

OP, your friend will get better-qualified advice if he posts on ftla.uk, in the Civil Penalties section.

Thanks - will take a look there.

Okell said:

Herzlos said:

Where was the car when the pedestrians blocked the path? You could try and argue that you were already in the box junction and had to stop for safety reasons, but I'm not sure if that'd be corroborated by the camera that caught you in the box.

I may be mistaken but my understanding is that stopping in a yellow box is only an infringement if you have to stop because of the presence of stationary vehicles.  I know the Highway Code says you must not enter a box junction unless your exit is clear, but I don't think that that is strictly correct.

If I've understood the OP correctly, they didn't stop in the box junction because of stationary vehicles ahead of them, but because they were waiting for pedestrians to clear the bit of footpath that the OP wanted to drive over.

I would have thought that was OK and not a traffic offence - but I may be wrong - or may have misunderstood what the OP has said...

That's interesting; yes, that is the situation.

born_again said:

To be fair no one here has seen them, which could have given a different perspective.

You're right - I didn't include the pics; I don't have them in electronic form. 

Rather I just said "there were pedestrians crossing the gap in the pavement between the yellow hatched areas, whom the driver had to give way to."

born_again

I guess their argument will be you should have seen the pedestrians crossing before starting your turn. 🤷‍♀️