1

Topic: Turn through 2 continuous

I welcome. In advance I apologize for many . In general, got here on a subject. Upon - a marking idiotic, and that is erased, on road slush. Behind turn - two-band one-sided road, but by rules it is possible to turn only on its right band. Because opposite to the left band - double continuous. On life all and turn in 2 rows. In right - by rules, through rupture, in left - a minimum one wheel through double (therefore the marking is erased there). Me stopped and began to "sew" 12.15.4 - driving on counter. I speak - you are not right, these are 12.16.2"turn or a turn in not supposed place". They showed to me any "" on which on video turn process is removed. I speak - well and? (I regret that did not specify in the protocol that showed to me any left  without the certificate). Turned, I do not deny. A marking it is not visible. If it there double - that it is ready to be punished on 12.16.2 and more so not to do. . But the interesting began. At first he told "When are ready to be in court?" - In what? - In world court of...th region. - yes it is never ready, for what? 12.16.2 - the penalty 1000-1500 without courts. - at you 12.15.4 - Is not present, and I will not sign the protocol with such article. - but you went on . - Yes, intersected it. - but same all the same driving on a counter band! Quitted, called by a telephone hotline. Told what to sign it is necessary, but is mandatory to specify circumstance and that do not agree. I specified. Then they something among themselves conferred, and to one another told "yes make out". While made out, the second to me  my rights and duties, and rules of obtaining of the rights after deprivation, and that all such clever go to court and there of all of them equally deprive, because driving on a counter band is. More shortly with them it to consider it was useless. And here suddenly to me give the protocol in which it is specified - to be in group of analysis of such number. WTF? What group of analysis? In court? Is not present? In general, I quit their machine, I sit down in the, there with me the acquaintance went. I speak - a pancake, , . And she already , and too speaks that it is 12.16.2 and 1-1,5 thousand penalty. I speak - well we go in witnesses you we write down. I approach to  and so - here the witness who went with me in the machine and is ready to confirm that a marking  is visible and that our manoeuvre - turn. He somehow spitefully asked the passport, wrote down in the protocol. Then with the lawyer spoke - she told that very strange course - to send in analysis group. Advised to write explanatory about visibility, about absence of the certificate on "camera", to specify that under given article it was never attracted. Called the familiar judge, that confirmed - with  articles at once to them direct, without analysis groups. And from you similar wanted money when frightened of court. Here it is actually interesting: 0. What except explanatory, the witness and the protocol it is possible and it is necessary to file? To take a picture of a marking there it is problematic, enough big traffic in this place. 1. What chances on if not the full justification, on 1500 penalties? For my part the witness, from their side "left" . 2. What chances then to have this inspector (it there I booze all "broke" - that leaving an ambush and overtaking me, it stopped also a finger, instead of a staff, showed on me and directed it towards a roadside, this plus "", plus a wrong direction to analysis group). To me at all on purpose from it to collect something. Simply that at it another time "conscience" woke up Where to write the complaint? To its heads or in Department of own safety? Or to hammer, for it is useless? 3. What to speak, that not to tell in analysis group? 4. There is a different judgement into the account of the partial justification. One advise - if to you tell that , not deprivation, and on the first time 5 the penalty - agree. Others say that it is not necessary to agree, since You defend the innocence, and then agree with charge that can be ambiguously treated. 5. What will be if not to come to analysis group? Transfer? Carry out the decision without me? How many it is possible not to come there? 6. If the decision of group of analysis will not suit me - at once to tell, what does not arrange and to ask to bring the matter into court? In court it is possible to submit , delaying period of delivery of the rights? (The rights are necessary on New Year's vacation, further figs with them, let take away, if it will not be possible to fulfill item 1). 7. Whether it is real in group of analysis and in court something to achieve most, or it is necessary to employ the lawyer? 8. Read that after court within three days it is necessary to hand over the rights. If not to hand over? Stop and can punch on basis, what the rights are selected?

2

Re: Turn through 2 continuous

Hello, Unforgiver, you wrote: Remaining - it is a lot of letters, I do not know. But about  - not , they not measured your speed,  to it to be certificated? Video as you turn not in that place - it and in  video, though on the iron removed. Generally any person can remove video and transfer in .

3

Re: Turn through 2 continuous

The main thing - do not do so more, this explicit violation. If there is no sign driving on bands - turn from an extreme band. U> 0. What except explanatory, the witness and the protocol it is possible and it is necessary to file? To take a picture of a marking there it is problematic, enough big traffic in this place. It is possible to request the circuit marking \signs, but I suspect that it not in your favor will be. U> 1. What chances on if not the full justification, on 1500 penalties? For my part the witness, from their side "left" . And what the witness speaks? What the violation fact at all there was no also you turned from an extreme row? Then chances of the justification any. Than  it was not pleasant to you - not clearly. U> 2. What chances then to have this inspector (it there I booze all "broke" - that leaving an ambush and overtaking me, it stopped also a finger, instead of a staff, showed on me and directed it towards a roadside, this plus "", plus a wrong direction to analysis group). To me at all on purpose from it to collect something. Simply that at it another time "conscience" woke up Where to write the complaint? To its heads or in Department of own safety? Or to hammer, for it is useless? Brad any. It correctly made all. Show signals the traffic controler can not only a stick, but also flags or it is simple hands. About  did not understand. In analysis you sent probably because you disagreed with qualification of article. If you agreed with qualification, but did not recognize fault on it - then in court would send. U> 3. What to speak, that not to tell in analysis group? U> 4. There is a different judgement into the account of the partial justification. One advise - if to you tell that , not deprivation, and on the first time 5 the penalty - agree. Others say that it is not necessary to agree, since you defend the innocence, and then agree with charge that can be ambiguously treated. U> 5. What will be if not to come to analysis group? Transfer? Carry out the decision without me? How many it is possible not to come there? U> 6. If the decision of group of analysis will not suit me - at once to tell, what does not arrange and to ask to bring the matter into court? In court it is possible to submit , delaying period of delivery of the rights? (The rights are necessary on New Year's vacation, further figs with them, let take away, if it will not be possible to fulfill item 1). U> 7. Whether it is real in group of analysis and in court something to achieve most, or it is necessary to employ the lawyer? It is possible to employ the lawyer, start up tries any formal reasons to find.

4

Re: Turn through 2 continuous

Hello, Unforgiver, you wrote: U> Here it is actually interesting: U> 0. What except explanatory, the witness and the protocol it is possible and it is necessary to file? To take a picture of a marking there it is problematic, enough big traffic in this place. A marking to photograph all the same costs. And signs before a crossroads. If there turn is forbidden only by a marking, but not a sign, and the marking is jammed, violation generally is not present. U> 1. What chances on if not the full justification, on 1500 penalties? For my part the witness, from their side "left" . Time in court did not send at once, chances of the penalty the good."  ", as far as I understand, not . AFAIR, the last rules  allowed to fix violations by any devices. U> 2. What chances then to have this inspector (it there I booze all"broke"- that leaving an ambush and overtaking me, it stopped also a finger, instead of a staff, showed on me and directed it towards a roadside, this plus"", plus a wrong direction to analysis group). For it chances to punish nearby the zero. Here for wrong qualification of violation (if it is registered in the protocol) it is possible to try to punish. Can be is reprimanded by the chief. U> where to write the complaint? The complaint addressed to the chief of department of traffic police. U> 3. What to speak, that not to tell in analysis group? To say exactly that sounded. Fulfilled turn within a crossroads, marking it is not visible, driving signs on bands/prohibiting signs are not present (if them really are not present), on  at turn did not leave, there is a witness. Not to say about that you know that there so break all. U> 4. There is a different judgement into the account of the partial justification. One advise - if to you tell that , not deprivation, and on the first time 5 the penalty - agree. Others say that it is not necessary to agree, since you defend the innocence, and then agree with charge that can be ambiguously treated. If that you wrote, truth, that is good chance that does not reach court. If reaches, can and condemn. And here already to you to solve, fight further and to try to go on the compromise. U> 5. What will be if not to come to analysis group? Transfer? Carry out the decision without me? How many it is possible not to come there? Most likely carry out the decision without you or bring the matter into court. To transfer it of sense is not present. U> 6. If the decision of group of analysis will not suit me - at once to tell, what does not arrange and to ask to bring the matter into court? As far as I understand, they can only on the penalty the decision write out. You can appeal against against it itself in court. They give Lishenchesky business to court. U> in court it is possible to submit , delaying period of delivery of the rights? (The rights are necessary on New Year's vacation, further figs with them, let take away, if it will not be possible to fulfill item 1). It is possible. If you appeal on a judgement of the first instance the decision does not enter validity. U> 7. Whether it is real in group of analysis and in court something to achieve most, or it is necessary to employ the lawyer? Really, if it is ready to understand subtleties of the administrative legislation and manufacture itself. It is possible on auto.ru in a forum of traffic police questions . There there were sensible people who practised struggle with  an arbitrariness earlier, and could give a good advice simply. U> 8. Read that after court within three days it is necessary to hand over the rights. If not to hand over? Stop and can punch on basis, what the rights are selected? With deprivation it is better not to go.

5

Re: Turn through 2 continuous

Hello, the Laid-back person, you wrote: Hello, Unforgiver, you wrote: Remaining - it is a lot of letters, I do not know. But about  - not , they not measured your speed,  to it to be certificated? Video as you turn not in that place - it and in  video, though on the iron removed. Generally any person can remove video and transfer in . In the law it is told: Since 2008 to fix violations of traffic regulations (including journey through double continuous) means - including a photo- and videocameras are used. Operating specifications demand, that cameras answered following conditions: - They have been certificated, transited checking and calibration. If there are no documents on checking of the specific camera, its usage is not admitted, and the proofs received with its help, cannot be used at decision removal on administrative business. Originally inspectors of traffic police tried to use home videocameras, but now it is absolutely inadmissible: specialized complexes can be applied to video- and the photographings which have undergone procedure of the statement only.

6

Re: Turn through 2 continuous

Let's look as it was

7

Re: Turn through 2 continuous

Hello, Unforgiver, you wrote: U> In the law it is told: Recently (almost since this year) like started to accept even video from the population, from any irons.

8

Re: Turn through 2 continuous

Hello, wraithik, you wrote: W> we Look as it there was Pravoslavno to turn as is drawn by a dark blue line. As I turned that - red. Yellow designated the erased marking (since there all so go), upon was also untidily.

9

Re: Turn through 2 continuous

Hello, _AND, you wrote: _AN> the Main thing - do not do so more, this explicit violation. If there is no sign driving on bands - turn from an extreme band. And at what here a driving sign on bands? I did not reach before rupture (and it is real for the reason that did not see there a marking, turn is resolved at this crossroads). So it is formal yes - I broke, and if the marking is, I never so do not do. _AN> it is possible to request the circuit marking \signs, but I suspect that it not in your favor will be. The circuit this one, and that as upon - the erased marking and  on road is absolutely another. U>> 1. What chances on if not the full justification, on 1500 penalties? For my part the witness, from their side "left" . _AN> And what the witness speaks? What the violation fact at all there was no also you turned from an extreme row? Then chances of the justification any. A row here at all at what. Yes, turned from an extreme left row. I drew the circuit more low - I did not reach before rupture. The witness speaks that there was a turn on the left, is possible through double continuous which  it is visible.

10

Re: Turn through 2 continuous

U> Pravoslavno to turn as it is drawn by a dark blue line. U> as I turned that - red. Yellow designated the erased marking (since there all so go), upon was also untidily. About so it is more clear. Request the circuit of signs and a marking for this section. Write request to local administration of region \city. Suddenly carries and there is not present continuous at a crossroads.

11

Re: Turn through 2 continuous

U> a Row here at all at what. Yes, turned from an extreme left row. I drew the circuit more low - I did not reach before rupture. U> the witness speaks that there was a turn on the left, is possible through double continuous which  it is visible. Yes, looked at the circuit, I at first not correctly understood. Answered more low.

12

Re: Turn through 2 continuous

Hello, _AND, you wrote: U>> Pravoslavno to turn as it is drawn by a dark blue line. U>> as I turned that - red. Yellow designated the erased marking (since there all so go), upon was also untidily. _AN> about so it is more clear. _AN> request the circuit of signs and a marking for this section. Write request to local administration of region \city. Suddenly carries and there is not present continuous at a crossroads. Is. It it is visible on Yandex panorama. On a summer variant. Here so the marking in the summer in clear day, without  on road looks. I turned approximately in that place where there is on a photo a white machine. https://yandex.ru/maps/213/moscow/?ll=3 … C80.000000

13

Re: Turn through 2 continuous

Hello, Unforgiver, you wrote: U> 0. What except explanatory, the witness and the protocol it is possible and it is necessary to file? To take a picture of a marking there it is problematic, enough big traffic in this place. Anything. The protocol by and large is interesting to the judge only. U> 1. What chances on if not the full justification, on 1500 penalties? For my part the witness, from their side "left" . You in the protocol agreed, what intersected the continuous? GAI OFFICERS (or at least you) wrote, what you on the left turned? That you generally broke nothing the judge does not check, since 1) there are no bases not to trust police officers, 2) indications of the witness of trust do not cause. I would not began and to try, only to irritate the judge. If from the protocol clearly that you turned on the left and in the course of manoeuvre called in on continuous, 12.16.2. That the judge of it to convince, refer to the Decision of Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation from 10/24/2006 N 18, there it is written: The actions of the driver connected to turn on the left or a turn in violation of requirements of traffic signs or a marking form the objective side of composition of the administrative offense provided by a part of 2 articles 12.16 of KoAP of the Russian Federation. For example, violation by the driver at realization of the specified manoeuvres of the requirements ordered: a marking 1.1, 1.3, 1.11, 1.18; traffic signs 4.1.1"Driving directly", 4.1.2"Driving to the right", 4.1.4"Driving directly or to the right", 3.18.2"Turn on the left is forbidden", 3.19"Turn is forbidden", 5.15.1"Directions of driving on bands", 5.15.2"Directions of driving on a band", 6.3.1"Place for a turn", 6.3.2"Zone for a turn". At you violations of the requirements ordered by a marking 1.3. It is better to write in advance on a paper the position and to ask it to file, instead of orally speaking. And if in the protocol it is written simply that you on  left, you should prove that you on the left turned. And they could write and for example:" Left on , and then turned ". And then generally you will prove nothing. U> 3. What to speak, that not to tell in analysis group? To speak just turned on the left and drove into a marking in the course of turn. All. U> 4. There is a different judgement into the account of the partial justification. One advise - if to you tell that , not deprivation, and on the first time 5 the penalty - agree. Others say that it is not necessary to agree, since you defend the innocence, and then agree with charge that can be ambiguously treated. By whom it is treated? If you accept the penalty and to butt not hunting - agree. Only there for repeated departure punishment there is more, and to prove what not a camel, it will be more difficult, after all you  already. U> 6. If the decision of group of analysis will not suit me - at once to tell, what does not arrange and to ask to bring the matter into court? In court it is possible to submit , delaying period of delivery of the rights? (The rights are necessary on New Year's vacation, further figs with them, let take away, if it will not be possible to fulfill item 1). They the rights to deprive like as cannot. Means direct to court if want to deprive. Hardly generally the court about New Year will be. And whether anyway the judgement comes into force only within 10 days that and if you submitted the appeal does not enter at all to the decision of the following instance. So not to hand over the right if did not take away, or to go on a piece of paper if took away, it is possible long enough. U> 7. Whether it is real in group of analysis and in court something to achieve most, or it is necessary to employ the lawyer?  it is real. I was helped by the lawyer, but it with me did not walk, and in a piece of paper too something especial did not write. But certainly the lawyer knows where to look at once in laws etc. In your case  and so all is clear, if the protocol "good". PS My experience small: Sewed driving on one-sided in a counter direction because of driving by back at a parallel parking near to a crossroads. In the second instance justified. In the first and did not begin to listen.

14

Re: Turn through 2 continuous

Hello, Unforgiver, you wrote: U> Is. It it is visible on Yandex panorama. On a summer variant. Instead of whether was once there two-way traffic? Very much the marking is similar to this case. If was, but it is already irrelevant, the marking is incorrectly put. There is a chance to dispute even the fact of violation.

15

Re: Turn through 2 continuous

Hello, LuciferNovoros, you wrote: LN> Hello, Unforgiver, you wrote: U>> Is. It it is visible on Yandex panorama. On a summer variant. LN> instead of whether was once there two-way traffic? Very much the marking is similar to this case. If was, but it is already irrelevant, the marking is incorrectly put. There is a chance to dispute even the fact of violation. After turn? ... I Doubt. I there periodically go last year 3, and it all time one-sided. That was before - I do not know. Repair not so long ago (in the spring 2017) was on this section, a marking drew then. I.e. it corresponds to that was the last 3 years. But basically - it turns out that  to turn in the left row generally in any way is impossible (and it there that going round on "circle" to be torn).

16

Re: Turn through 2 continuous

Hello, Unforgiver, you wrote: U> as I turned That - red. Yellow designated the erased marking (since there all so go), upon was also untidily. Under this circuit driving on  cannot be applied, as at a crossroads there is no concept of lanes.

17

Re: Turn through 2 continuous

Hello, Sshur, you wrote: S> Hello, Unforgiver, you wrote: S> Under this circuit driving on  cannot be applied, as at a crossroads there is no concept of lanes. Well and yes, similar they try to apply that case when someone "cuts" a corner of a crossroads and turns hardly before a crossroads, passing on . Normally so deaf cork, and desired departure - here it, in 10 m ahead do when forward. The crossroads begins with curving of travelers of parts. If you turned before curving - that yes, it is driving on . If after, even through double continuous (but like it so is drawn that the dotted line begins approximately in the same place where curving) violations are not present. Video is necessary, more shortly.

18

Re: Turn through 2 continuous

Hello, Roma Mik, you wrote: > Hello, Unforgiver, you wrote: U>> 0. What except explanatory, the witness and the protocol it is possible and it is necessary to file? To take a picture of a marking there it is problematic, enough big traffic in this place. > Anything. The protocol by and large is interesting to the judge only. For the present analysis group, instead of court. U>> 1. What chances on if not the full justification, on 1500 penalties? For my part the witness, from their side "left" . > you in the protocol agreed, what intersected the continuous? GAI OFFICERS (or at least you) wrote, what you on the left turned? They wrote that I made driving on a counter band and 12.15.4. I wrote that do not agree, turned on the left and it is 12.16.2. > That you generally broke nothing the judge does not check, since 1) there are no bases not to trust police officers, 2) indications of the witness of trust do not cause. I would not began and to try, only to irritate the judge. Did not begin to try that? To cause the witness or to try to justify? > If from the protocol clearly that you turned on the left and in the course of manoeuvre called in on continuous, 12.16.2. That the judge of it to convince, refer to the Decision of Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation from 10/24/2006 N 18, there it is written: > the Actions of the driver connected to turn on the left or a turn in violation of requirements of traffic signs or a marking form the objective side of composition of the administrative offense provided by a part of 2 articles 12.16 of KoAP of the Russian Federation. For example, violation by the driver at realization of the specified manoeuvres of the requirements ordered: a marking 1.1, 1.3, 1.11, 1.18; traffic signs 4.1.1"Driving directly", 4.1.2"Driving to the right", 4.1.4"Driving directly or to the right", 3.18.2"Turn on the left is forbidden", 3.19"Turn is forbidden", 5.15.1"Directions of driving on bands", 5.15.2"Directions of driving on a band", 6.3.1"Place for a turn", 6.3.2"Zone for a turn". > At you violations of the requirements ordered by a marking 1.3. It is better to write in advance on a paper the position and to ask it to file, instead of orally speaking. Thanks! > And if in the protocol it is written simply that you on  left, you should prove that you on the left turned. And they could write and for example:" Left on , and then turned ". And then generally you will prove nothing. Simply" left on a counter band and made on it driving ". U>> 3. What to speak, that not to tell in analysis group? > to Speak just turned on the left and drove into a marking in the course of turn. All. U>> 6. If the decision of group of analysis will not suit me - at once to tell, what does not arrange and to ask to bring the matter into court? In court it is possible to submit , delaying period of delivery of the rights? (The rights are necessary on New Year's vacation, further figs with them, let take away, if it will not be possible to fulfill item 1). > they the rights to deprive like as cannot. Means direct to court if want to deprive. Hardly generally the court about New Year will be. And whether anyway the judgement comes into force only within 10 days that and if you submitted the appeal does not enter at all to the decision of the following instance. So not to hand over the right if did not take away, or to go on a piece of paper if took away, it is possible long enough. Clearly, thanks.

19

Re: Turn through 2 continuous

Hello, Sshur, you wrote: S> Hello, Sshur, you wrote: S>> Hello, Unforgiver, you wrote: S>> Under this circuit driving on  cannot be applied, as at a crossroads there is no concept of lanes. S> well and yes, similar they try to apply that case when someone "cuts" a corner of a crossroads and turns hardly before a crossroads, passing on . Normally so deaf cork, and desired departure - here it, in 10 m ahead do when forward. Yes, about this case it is known (met analyses on the Internet). But there a blunt angle AFTER turn. Type you after turn appeared on  (in a perpendicular direction already). S> the Crossroads begins with curving of travelers of parts. If you turned before curving - that yes, it is driving on . If after, even through double continuous (but like it so is drawn that the dotted line begins approximately in the same place where curving) violations are not present. Video is necessary, more shortly. Before curving it is absolutely not real. There a traffic light for passers, and machines stand normally.

20

Re: Turn through 2 continuous

Hello, Roma Mik, you wrote: U>> 4. There is a different judgement into the account of the partial justification. One advise - if to you tell that , not deprivation, and on the first time 5 the penalty - agree. Others say that it is not necessary to agree, since you defend the innocence, and then agree with charge that can be ambiguously treated. > by Whom it is treated? If you accept the penalty and to butt not hunting - agree. Only there for repeated departure punishment there is more, and to prove what not a camel, it will be more difficult, after all you  already. Here it by the way too one of the reasons on which it would not be desirable to agree. U>> 6. If the decision of group of analysis will not suit me - at once to tell, what does not arrange and to ask to bring the matter into court? In court it is possible to submit , delaying period of delivery of the rights? (The rights are necessary on New Year's vacation, further figs with them, let take away, if it will not be possible to fulfill item 1). > they the rights to deprive like as cannot. Means direct to court if want to deprive. Hardly generally the court about New Year will be. And whether anyway the judgement comes into force only within 10 days that and if you submitted the appeal does not enter at all to the decision of the following instance. So not to hand over the right if did not take away, or to go on a piece of paper if took away, it is possible long enough.  do not take away. And a question on court - "direct to court if want to deprive" - and how? Tell "come to court of such number?" Or simply tell that direct, and to me then the camp-up send?

21

Re: Turn through 2 continuous

Hello, Sshur, you wrote: S> Hello, Sshur, you wrote: S>> Hello, Unforgiver, you wrote: S>> Under this circuit driving on  cannot be applied, as at a crossroads there is no concept of lanes. S> well and yes, similar they try to apply that case when someone "cuts" a corner of a crossroads and turns hardly before a crossroads, passing on . Normally so deaf cork, and desired departure - here it, in 10 m ahead do when forward. S> the Crossroads begins with curving of travelers of parts. If you turned before curving - that yes, it is driving on . If after, even through double continuous (but like it so is drawn that the dotted line begins approximately in the same place where curving) violations are not present. Video is necessary, more shortly. http://rsdn.org/forum/auto/6992750.1 the author: Unforgiver Date: 13.12 15:06 Here I laid out a panorama. The crossroads for the white machine whence begins? From a place where on the opposite side a pole or from a place where signs "Principal road" and "Driving only directly"?

22

Re: Turn through 2 continuous

Hello, Unforgiver, you wrote: _AN>> the Main thing - do not do so more, this explicit violation. If there is no sign driving on bands - turn from an extreme band. U> and at what here a driving sign on bands? I did not reach before rupture (and it is real for the reason that did not see there a marking, turn is resolved at this crossroads). U> so it is formal yes - I broke, and if the marking is, I never so do not do. You can go to the chief of separation of traffic police which is responsible for this crossroads, orally to state it a situation and to hand over it the complaint to a paper that the marking not in accordance with GOST that influences safety of journey of a crossroads, the request to correct a situation, to find and punish guilty etc., etc. to Rest here follows on a poor-quality marking, instead of on left  is, etc. possible, he lets know that is ready to shut eyes to your violation (or to retrain it under easier article) in exchange for that you will not give to this complaint the formal course. It is better to make it to analysis group while the formal decision on your question will not be accepted, it will be easier to chief of separation to change a situation in your favor. Especially for the sake of you it but if it will be easier to it "to understand position" will not tear a bum, than to understand with your complaint duly, that is the considerable chance that it goes to you on a meeting.

23

Re: Turn through 2 continuous

Hello, Tyomchik, you wrote: Those> This such awful violation directly to deprive of the rights? Traffic police  on . Formally at us this deprivation. It also write out, if catch.

24

Re: Turn through 2 continuous

Hello, Unforgiver, you wrote: U> And a question on court - "direct to court if want to deprive" - and how? Tell "come to court of such number?" Give a piece of paper. In it date. But you to it do not trust. The court assigns meeting for other date, and sends you the camp-up. But me personally the camp-up is not reached. I reached court in date from a piece of paper, and there to me already told, on when meeting assigned. For certain it is possible to ring.

25

Re: Turn through 2 continuous

Hello, Unforgiver, you wrote: U> Hello, wraithik, you wrote: W>> we Look as it was U> Image: .PNG U> Pravoslavno to turn as it is drawn by a dark blue line. U> as I turned that - red. Yellow designated the erased marking (since there all so go), upon was also untidily. At a crossroads there is no concept of a counter band. You are obliged to leave from intersection of travelers of parts so that not to appear on counter. On it though a cancer rise. A marking moronic any. There the arrow on the left was? Signs what stand. Give still a panorama, we look. A maximum there 1500. Of me wanted as to deprive in the autumn. I explained at once that at a crossroads counter was not present, and  I on the. And at me it was more dangerous, was separating, there to appear on  easily. UPD: on what lines went? Dark blue are a deprivation.