This blog is not about a person, rather it is dedicated to an issue.
Here in the UK (as in other countries) we have a traffic control measure known as a Box Junction (sometimes referred to as a Yellow Box). From its introduction it was the job of the police to enforce the box junction rules.
Recently, in London, the responsibility for enforcement has been passed to the Local Councils who have been granted permission to erect surveillance cameras overlooking box junctions and to issue fixed penalties to drivers who stop illegally in the marked area. There are plans to roll out this scheme nationwide in the near future.
Many people perceive this change to be just another motoring stealth tax, or an additional revenue raising scam for cash strapped local councils. It raises concern, and could be construed as evidence to support the claim that the UK is sleepwalking into a “Surveillance Society”.
For a system of summary justice like this to be acceptable, people must believe that the administering authorities “…are without prejudice and never make mistakes. It also assumes that scientific processes are never discredited and that computers never go wrong.” [Observer leader 5th Nov 2006 ] That certainly is not the case at present. We live in an imperfect world.
The purpose of a Box Junction is to reduce congestion. Like most good ideas it is simple, effective and cheap to implement. However, it can be argued that, with the best will in the world, it is just not possible for drivers to safely obey the box junction rules 100% of the time. On that basis the current enforcement scheme will exploit the misfortunes of well intentioned, drivers.
The offence is one of “entering and stopping within a box junction when prohibited”, therefore the onus is on the issuer of the fixed penalty notice to prove that the vehicle was stationary. So what is the legal definition of “stationary”? Given that the junction is being monitored with a low resolution CCTV camera, is it possible to tell the difference between 0 mph and 1 mph? Assuming you can tell the difference, for what period of time must the vehicle remain in the same spot, 1 millisecond, 1 second, ten seconds?
This whole issue needs to be questioned and thoroughly examined. If necessary it should be legally challenged. Hopefully, with your help, this blog will help to achieve that objective.
Money Box Junction 
Interesting Blog. I came via the Pepipoo site. Ive just been sent a PCN via CCTV from City of London. I parked my minibus in a loading bay outside a boarded up Smithfield Market on a quiet Saturday morning. Bastards eh! I had quite a shock to get the ticket sent to me. How this country is going to the dogs. Just how far will this CCTV intrusion go I wonder?
Anyway, good luck with your campiagn against box junctions.
Steve
🙂
I hope you dont mind , I have used one of your posts on my site that I opperate to inform London taxi drivers. It has answered a burning question that I have been asked many times. I think your site is fantastic and only hope more people start to rebel against this form of daylight robbery. I have put a link on my site and i hope you have many hits from the cab trade.
James.
Have been reading the interesting articles about the wording on the PCN for box junction offence. I have received one from Islington with apparently non compliant wording as shown on the examples.
The paragraph referred to states – “If you do not pay or make representations before the end of the 28 day period the charge will increase…”
From reading the site this should be worded differently.
Is this a valid reason for appeal and if yes, what wording should the appeal state?
Any guidance welcomed and thank you.
Hello, and thanks for a very informed and informative site.
Here’s one for the Section 6* fans out there:
I have just received a PCN (for the very box pictured at the top of this page) which is out of date – the date of the “alleged contravention” and the date of the Notice are more than 28 days apart. This is because I’d only just bought the car at the time, so they sent the PCN to the previous keeper. who filled in the new keeper name and address part and sent it back to them.
SO. My pedantic but potentially useful question is, is this covered in the Section 6 exemption? I think not, because they didn’t need to apply to the Secretary for State for relevant particulars – these were supplied to them on the form by the previous owner. Not only that, but the fact that the PCN arrived here addressed “To Whom It May Concern” suggests that they didn’t get any relevant particulars, or if they did, they couldn’t be bothered to write them on the notice.
In any case, the burden of proof must then be on Islington Council to prove both that they applied for relevant particulars from the SoS, and that they didn’t receive them before their 28 days was up.
What do we think?
Cheers,
– Ed
(section 6: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/2003/3/section/6/enacted)
Hi,
Does anyone know if the T box junction at Herbert Road/The Broadway Southall is non compliant. One of the corners has a 10 inch gap from the kerb and the box also meets with double yellow lines, is that legal?
There are also a set of traffic lights directly beyond the box which makes stopping in the box unavoidable at times. Is there a minimum distance lights should be sited from the box?
And do all cctv cameras being used to capture moving traffic offences and issue pcn’s through the post have clear signage stating that they are there and what they are being used for?
Thanks
Celebrity Workouts…
[…why would I do that. Because as seen on this blog, it’s been…]…
Hi,
Today i receive a PCN bcs of entering in box junction, i just stay in box junction for 13 seconds and front wheels out of the box as well , . Is there any time limit
Hi
Can anyone help me with PCN on shepherds bush green? My car was stationary for 6 seconds as i turned right with 50% on YBJ
Any views?
Thank you
Jackie