Informal Rejection
Below 3 pictures are my formal representation details
The rest of the pictures below are the notice of rejection from council 
Here is the draft version I am going to present in the London Tribunals. - I appeal on the ground that the alleged contravention did not occur. My vehicle was parked outside nos. 236/238 Central Park Road. The Temporary Traffic Regulation Order (TTRO) the authority relies on has not been produced, and as I understand it, it neither suspends the existing parking provisions nor prohibits waiting or loading. In addition the temporary restriction relied on by Newham Council applied only to the parking bays outside nos. 147 and 163.
My vehicle was not within the restricted area : My vehicle (registration XXXXXXX) was parked outside numbers 236/238 Central Park Road. The council’s own PCN photographs confirm this location.
The restriction applied only to the parking bays outside numbers 147 and 163. The use of the word “opposite” on the signage was confusing, and I have not seen the term used in this way elsewhere. For example, Geoffrey Gardens is opposite door numbers 153-155. Does this mean the restriction applies to the entire length of that road ?
I have also located a photograph of the yellow advance warning board placed when the work was carried out on the area outside the next set of doors on Central Park Road (see attached image PN26198819_App1). This board states explicitly the door numbers where the restrictions applied on both sides of the road. This shows that the council is able to give clear, unambiguous information, and that it failed to do so at the location where my vehicle was parked.
Please review the council’s own PCN photographs against the signage on the day. The inconsistency points to a failure in operational standards. It has caused unnecessary inconvenience to me, and likely to other Newham residents, and led directly to the issuing of this PCN.
Missing evidence :The PCN was issued on the assumption that a yellow advance warning board, said to give effect to a TTRO, suspended the existing parking controls and imposed a prohibition on waiting and loading.
That assumption is incorrect. As I understand the TTRO relied on, its operative effect is limited to restricting traffic access to certain roads. A restriction on vehicular access does not impose or substitute parking restrictions. The existing statutory parking controls at this location therefore remained in force.
Section 14(7) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 provides that an order made under that section may suspend statutory provisions. When I requested, the authority has not shown that the TTRO relied on does this. It has not suspended, amended or replaced the parking controls applicable to the location.
The authority has never provided me with a copy of the TTRO, nor identified the provision it says I breached. It must show, with the TTRO itself, that:
a) the TTRO was validly made and in force on the date and at the location of the alleged contravention
b) the TTRO suspended the existing parking place at that location and
c) the TTRO imposed a prohibition on waiting and/or loading at that location.
Claimed Roadworks for 20/06 : The works on the road only commenced the following week and not on 20/06 (Saturday), the date of the alleged contravention :It is worth noting that if the underlying reason for the restriction or suspension did not materialise, the authority no longer has a basis to restrict the parking place or issue a PCN. In this case, no works took place on Saturday 20/06, meaning the
justification for the restriction was absent.
I note that pursuing this PCN has required considerable personal time and effort across informal and formal representations, because the authority has not provided the basic evidence needed to assess its case. I ask that the Adjudicator take account of this when considering the authority’s conduct.
The alleged contravention did not occur. The authority has not produced the TTRO they claimed it suspended parking or shown that it suspended the parking place or prohibited waiting at this location. Even if a restriction existed, the details of signage was inadequate and confusing as I have evidenced it to inform drivers where exactly it applied. So I can I please ask that the appeal be allowed and the PCN cancelled ?
Timcombe - Can you please review the details and let me know your thoughts ?