P
Paul_C
So what was the alleged offense on the fixed penalty notice?
Wrong Lane
- Thread starter Bahco
- Start date
So what was the alleged offense on the fixed penalty notice?
Sponsored Links
P
Paul_C
Does it cite a specific section of legislation?
A
Alarm
Translated "Damn I got caught"
Sponsored Links
if you cannot get in the correct lane you need glasses,,,,,,,,
lucky you were not driving in somerset last night as you are not the best person to be in the correct lane..
lucky you were not driving in somerset last night as you are not the best person to be in the correct lane..
P
Paul_C
Getting into the marked lanes (which are not mandatory anyway) might be easy enough when you already know the layout of the junction ahead. But when driving in an unfamiliar area with a lot of traffic about, it's not at all unusual to find that by the time you see the road markings and try to slot in between the cars in the adjacent lane you're already almost at the junction.
Firstly you are mad for opting for court over a non-endorsable £30 fine.
Secondly 10 months is very long and your chances of court are very very low unless there is an absolute backlog.
Did the police car that stopped you have a ProVida? (video evidence camera) or was it just a beat car?
Secondly 10 months is very long and your chances of court are very very low unless there is an absolute backlog.
Did the police car that stopped you have a ProVida? (video evidence camera) or was it just a beat car?
Might be but its my neck on the line and we will see.
Mw Roofline said:
Its 11 months actually but thanks for your opinion.
Mw Roofline said:
It was an unmarked car and I did not see a ProVida whilst sitting in the back of their car.
Lots of opinions which are appreciated and I will update you on the outcome.
May be spending Xmas in jail!
I could have sworn there was a guy on the tv (on watchdog or similar) who was nicked for making a turn "against the direction arrows", for want of a better phrase.
Ok, it was somewhat different circumstances which led him to spend a small fortune arguing the toss (he'd ran someone over who stepped out in front of him without even looking, because "you can't turn in here" - victim's own words, admitting he never bothered looking when he crossed the road there ).
I think the long and the short of it was the driver was found not guilty, on the basis that the road marking did not prohibit the turn he made - if he'd turned left in defiance of a "no left turn" sign, he'd have been screwed. Turning left from a "straight ahead" lane was not strictly an offence.
(And I have no sympathy for the numpty who wanders into a road without looking - although he's as liable to be mown down by some wannabee on a mtb as anything else)!
Ok, it was somewhat different circumstances which led him to spend a small fortune arguing the toss (he'd ran someone over who stepped out in front of him without even looking, because "you can't turn in here" - victim's own words, admitting he never bothered looking when he crossed the road there
).I think the long and the short of it was the driver was found not guilty, on the basis that the road marking did not prohibit the turn he made - if he'd turned left in defiance of a "no left turn" sign, he'd have been screwed. Turning left from a "straight ahead" lane was not strictly an offence.
(And I have no sympathy for the numpty who wanders into a road without looking - although he's as liable to be mown down by some wannabee on a mtb as anything else)!
P
Paul_C
The Traffic Signs Regulations & General Directions 2002:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/3113/contents/made
Look at no. 1035 in schedule 6 for the lane arrows in question. Notice that it says only "Appropriate traffic lanes for different destinations," so it is not imposing anything mandatory, unlike the markings in 1036 which add "Turn left," "Ahead only" or "Turn right" below the arrow and which are mandatory (and will be supported by an appropriate sign).
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/3113/contents/made
Look at no. 1035 in schedule 6 for the lane arrows in question. Notice that it says only "Appropriate traffic lanes for different destinations," so it is not imposing anything mandatory, unlike the markings in 1036 which add "Turn left," "Ahead only" or "Turn right" below the arrow and which are mandatory (and will be supported by an appropriate sign).
A
Alarm
you have quoted the sizes the markings need to be.
P
Paul_C
Yes, and also what mandatory action or prohibition, if any, the markings convey. For example, no. 1003 in schedule 6 - "Vehicular traffic must give way in accordance with the requirements of regulation 25." Or look at sign no. 606 in schedule 2, which is the white arrow on a blue disk mandatory turn sign - "Vehicular traffic must proceed in the direction indicated by the arrow."
There is no mandatory action or prohibition associated with the markings for no. 1035.
A
Alarm
If your right i`ll acknowledge it.
But I cannot see traffic law referenced from a guide to painting lines being used by a Judge, Barrister, Solicitor or copper .
But I cannot see traffic law referenced from a guide to painting lines being used by a Judge, Barrister, Solicitor or copper .
P
Paul_C
It's not just "a guide to painting lines." The TSR&GD 2002 is a statutory instrument, i.e. legislation, which defines what legal requirements or prohibitions certain signs and markings convey, and exactly how those signs and markings must be displayed in order to have legal force.
Sponsored Links
