Author Topic: Brent PCN, Code: 01, Honeypot Lane (near junction with Westmoreland Road), Obscured Sign  (Read 790 times)

0 Members and 16 Guests are viewing this topic.

Hello,

I need advice on appealing a PCN I received on Sunday 15th February at 8:49 AM for parking on a single yellow line.
I have been a resident in this area for 9 years and hold a valid resident permit. The evening before the PCN, I returned home after dark and all resident bays were full, so I parked on a single yellow line. The nearest clearly visible sign was for an adjacent pay-and-display bay and stated restrictions Monday–Saturday, so I reasonably believed Sunday parking was allowed.

When I discovered the PCN the next morning, I walked around the area and found a sign indicating the restriction—but it is facing away from the road I had parked on. There were no other signs visible from my position, and the road is quite busy with vehicles traveling at around 30mph, so it is unsafe to exit the car and inspect signage. I have photos taken at night showing the visibility issue.

I understand that under Regulations, signs must clearly inform drivers of restrictions. I believe this PCN was unfair due to inadequate and poorly oriented signage and the inability to reasonably know about Sunday restrictions.

In this case, the combination of:
  • the clearly visible nearby sign indicating Monday–Saturday restrictions
  • the absence of visible signage facing the location where the vehicle was parked
  • the orientation of the relevant sign facing away from the location
  • the risk posed by the road’s speed and traffic density

Location: Honeypot Lane (near junction with Westmoreland Road)
Google Street view link: https://maps.app.goo.gl/xSxijRq4McojfFgp9

My question: what is the best way to frame an appeal? Should I focus on signage visibility, safety concerns, or both? Any guidance on evidence or precedents that strengthen this type of appeal would be very helpful.

Thank you for your advice.
Jon






« Last Edit: February 19, 2026, 02:17:04 pm by echo »

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook



PS: It is a Europcar rental car while our car is being repaired - I contacted Europcar and they said to also email any appeal details to them as well as the council.

Your biggest problem is gonna be the fact that it's a rental car. If the council writes to Europcar and tells them there's a penalty charge notice against the car, Europcar will charge a £50 admin fee.

Europcar will also either:

  • just pay the penalty charge notice, then bill it to your credit card
  • supply your name and address to the council, transferring liability to you

Europcar also say they won't refund the £50 admin charge if you win the appeal. They'll only refund it if you win and the council confirms in writing that the penalty charge notice should never have been issued. That's a really weird requirement and councils don't usually give that. So it looks like you won't be getting that £50 back easily.

That kind of changes your priorities when dealing with appeals. Instead of doing "the right thing", you're focusing on "what will cost me less?". There are some places in England where a penalty charge is only £25 if you pay up quickly - it makes more sense to pay those than it does to pay the £50 Europcar admin fee, for example.

Your most important question is, do you have good reasons to appeal, or should you pay the £80 before it goes up to £130 or £210 once Europcar get involved?

Councils are allowed to have yellow lines that have different enforcement days and times to the bays. That isn't unusual - it happens in a lot of places. Assuming the lines will have the same times as the bays generally isn't a good idea.

The sign for the single yellow line (the small yellow one) being twisted and facing away from the road is a potential problem. That makes it much harder to see, especially at night in the dark. Some councils would back down if you showed photographic evidence of that - I know my local council would. But London councils are known to play hardball and reject everyone's first challenge. That's probably your strongest appeal point if you do decide to appeal.

Thanks for your detailed reply,  I really appreciate you taking the time.

My main concern here is that it is not right for vehicles to be fined in this location given the positioning of the sign. The single yellow line time plate is rotated away from the carriageway. From where I parked (at night), the only clearly visible sign was the pay-and-display sign facing the road, which states Monday–Saturday restrictions. The yellow line plate was not visible from that position.

I understand that yellow lines can have different hours from bays, but in this case the issue isn’t the difference in restriction — it’s that the relevant sign is not properly oriented. It appears misaligned to the extent that it does not adequately convey the restriction. I honestly struggle to understand how enforcement at that location can be considered fair if the sign is facing away from the line.

I had thought that Brent would likely reject an initial appeal and that it might need to go to the tribunal stage. My hope would be that an adjudicator would take the view that the restriction was not adequately signed due to the positioning of the time plate.

If it did go that far and the tribunal found in my favour on the basis that the contravention did not occur (due to inadequate signage), would that decision normally be strong enough to challenge Europcar’s £50 admin fee? If their terms are that they only refund it if the council confirms the PCN should never have been issued, which seems like an unusual requirement. If a tribunal allows the appeal, is that generally considered equivalent to the PCN being invalid from the outset?

Given Brent’s £80 discount and the £50 admin fee risk, I’m trying to balance the principle with the figures,  but at the same time, the signage genuinely appears defective.

Any thoughts appreciated.

Please post a GSV link to the location.

You can submit an informal challenge to the PCN, and it will inevitably be rejected, because all London councils ruthlessly game the system to maximise the cash, and know that when they reject, over 95% of people then pay-up. If you then do not pay the sum demanded, (usually the discounted amount), they will send a Notice to Owner to the name and address on the V5C Registration Certificate and that is the Europcar company who will, in all likelihood advise you of this, pay the NtO, and charge you an extra fee of £50 as Lexy says.

Only when you get a PCN with your name and address on it can you formally appeal it, and be able to take the council to London Tribunals.

Anywa, post the GSV link and let us see the sign layout.

Thanks for the reply. Here is the GSV link to the location: https://maps.app.goo.gl/xSxijRq4McojfFgp9

However, the Street View I am being shown appears to be from 2016. You can see the current view, as it was when I parked there, here: https://imgpile.com/p/vmjizJG#frGG3xf

The key issue is that the single yellow line time plate is oriented away from the carriageway and was not visible from where I parked, particularly at night. The only clearly visible sign facing the road indicated Monday–Saturday restrictions, which is what led me to believe Sunday was unrestricted.

From what you’re saying, because it’s a hire vehicle, I may not even get the opportunity to take it to tribunal unless liability is transferred to me. That seems extremely unfair, especially if the signage itself is defective.

I suppose my only immediate option is to submit an informal challenge to the council and see whether they exercise discretion.

The whole situation feels very unfair, particularly where signage is not properly positioned yet enforcement is still taking place.

Any further thoughts appreciated.

I think the yellow line is still the same length now as it is in the GSV 2016 view, but in the 2016 view, there is no marked-out parking bay or sign, which there needs to be for the current sign that gives the parking arrangements.

The biggest problem for you is that the PCN was served because you were on, or partially on, the yellow line. Did you not notice this when parking ? If you park on a yellow line, you have a duty to look for the sign giving the restricted times and there is a sign, albeit turned away.

Any possibility of a photo showing the road in daylight with the road markings shown, because your photo is from the other side of the road ?

Thanks for your response.

Here is a daylight photo of the location showing the road markings more clearly: https://imgpile.com/p/ZWkGqPI

I was aware I was parking on a single yellow line. That’s why I specifically looked for the time plate before leaving the vehicle. The only sign visible from where I was standing next to the car was the larger parking sign facing the carriageway, which states Monday–Saturday restrictions. There are no other signs facing the road.

The single yellow time plate was not visible from beside the vehicle without walking further along the carriageway. This is a relatively busy road where vehicles regularly travel at  30mph (or more), there is no proper pavement at that point, and the ground was wet and muddy due to recent heavy rain. It would not have felt safe or reasonable to walk along the edge of the carriageway searching for a sign when I had already checked the only one clearly facing the road.

I understand the principle that if you park on a yellow line you must check the restriction. That is exactly what I attempted to do. My argument isn’t that I failed to look, it’s that the relevant sign is not positioned in a way that adequately conveys the restriction to motorists parking lawfully and checking signage from their vehicle.

It only applies to that specific single yellow section (it becomes double yellow at the corner), so I cannot see why the time plate would need to be angled away from the carriageway. If properly oriented, it would be directly visible to drivers parking there.

My concern is whether a sign that is rotated away from the road satisfies the requirement that restrictions be clearly and adequately conveyed.

Any further thoughts appreciated.

All very well, but the sign you took to be the correct sign, shows by what is on it that it isn't the sign for the yellow line as well as the marked out parking bay. If it was it would have had the No Waiting symbol on a yellow background with days and times parking is barred, at the top of the sign, then the parking information below it. Yes, the sign for the yellow line is bent round but it is there if one looks for it.

So, assuming the council won't give way, are you prepared to take them to London Tribunals and risk the full PCN ? You have that right in law, but I have to say it would not be a guaranteed win.

I do understand the situation now,  what I’m trying to get across is that at the time of parking, the restriction applicable to the single yellow line was not adequately conveyed. I thought that under the regulations, the authority has a duty to ensure that the effect of a traffic order is adequately indicated by traffic signs. My point is that a time plate rotated away from the carriageway and not visible from the parking position does not adequately convey the restriction.

It was only after receiving the PCN, and returning in daylight specifically to search the area, that I located the relevant time plate. It is oriented away from where a driver would reasonably stand after parking. I don’t think it is correct to say that simply because a sign exists somewhere nearby, the restriction is necessarily adequately signed.

This is a relatively busy road with traffic usually moving at 30mph. It is the kind of road where you have to be very careful even getting in and out of the vehicle. There is no proper footway at the exact point where I parked, and further ahead there is a central pedestrian refuge island which narrows the carriageway and channels vehicles into tighter lanes. Walking along the edge of that stretch of carriageway to search for signage, particularly at night and in wet conditions, does not feel safe or reasonable. I would argue that the test should be whether the restriction is clearly visible to a reasonably diligent motorist from the vehicle or its immediate vicinity, not whether it can be discovered after a search.

I accept that this would not be a guaranteed win. However, my concern is not that I misunderstood a clearly presented restriction, it is that the relevant sign is misaligned in a way that fails to properly face the traffic to which it applies.

My uncertainty at this stage is because this is a Europcar courtesy vehicle, I’m not yet sure whether liability will be transferred to me, which would allow me to take the matter to a Tribunal. If it is transferred and I am able to make formal representations, then I would be prepared to test whether the signage satisfies the requirement to adequately convey the restriction.

YOu need to check with Europcar, but my understanding is they just pay the Notice to Owner when it arrives, and add handling fee of £50 on top. If they do this, then just paying the discount now is your best option.

Provided you challenge before 28th you preserve the discount for a further 14 days.

I suggest you make reps and test their response on your main point.

Thanks for the guidance so far.

I’ve emailed Europcar - no response yet. I decided to submit an informal challenge to test the council’s position and preserve the discount. Below this message is a copy of my draft appeal. I would really appreciate any comments on the wording or approach before I submit it.

My argument is that although I now understand the restriction, the relevant yellow line sign was rotated away from the carriageway and not visible from where I parked. It was only after receiving the PCN and returning in daylight that I found it. I believe that fails the requirement for adequate signage.

Any suggestions on tightening this up or strengthening the signage argument would be very welcome.

Also, if liability is transferred from Europcar to me and it progresses to London Tribunals, does this read like something an adjudicator would properly consider, or am I missing a stronger technical angle?

I’ve also uploaded a short video to show what this stretch of road is actually like in practice. It demonstrates how vehicles tend to approach at around 30mph, how narrow the carriageway becomes near the pedestrian refuge island, and the lack of proper footway alongside the single yellow line.

It was raining heavily on the night I parked, and the verge was wet and muddy. I didn’t feel it was safe to start walking along the edge of the carriageway looking for additional signage, particularly with traffic moving at speed and no proper pavement where I was parked. The video hopefully gives a clearer sense of the conditions and why the misaligned sign was not apparent from where I parked the vehicle.

Any thoughts on whether this strengthens the signage argument would be appreciated. (had to split the video into 2 files to upload them)

https://cdn.imgpile.com/p/vmjizJG#hdOZmOf

https://cdn.imgpile.com/p/vmjizJG#cF51eyw


APPEAL TEXT:

Dear Sir or Madam,

I am writing to formally appeal the above Penalty Charge Notice [number], which was issued on Sunday morning at 8:49 AM for parking on a single yellow line.

I wish to challenge PCN  on the basis that the restriction was not adequately signed in accordance with the council’s duty to provide clear and lawful signage.

I hold a valid resident permit for this area and have lived locally for approximately nine years. During this time, I have always made every effort to comply with parking restrictions and have never knowingly parked in contravention of them.

On the evening prior to the PCN being issued, I returned home after dark and, as is frequently the case in this area, there were no available resident parking bays. I therefore parked on the single yellow line.

Before leaving the vehicle, I checked the only sign  visible from my position beside the vehicle. That sign indicated a Monday–Saturday restriction and gives no indication that parking was prohibited at the time I parked.

As single yellow line restrictions commonly mirror the operational hours shown on nearby parking plates, I reasonably understood that parking on the Sunday morning would be unrestricted.

The sign that apparently applies to the single yellow line was not visible from where I parked. It is rotated away from the carriageway and from the length of single yellow line to which it relates. It was only after receiving the PCN, and returning in daylight to investigate, that I located this sign turned away from the road it applies to. It would not reasonably be seen by a motorist approaching or parking on that side of the road, particularly at night.

This is a relatively busy road with narrow running lanes and a central pedestrian refuge on either side of the location which constrains traffic flow. Vehicles regularly travel at 30mph. There is no proper pavement at the precise location where the sign is positioned, and on the night I parked there the verge was wet and muddy due to recent heavy rain. It would not be reasonable or safe to expect a motorist to walk into or alongside live traffic in order to search for signage that should have been clearly visible from the point of parking.

The authority has a duty to ensure that signage is clearly visible and correctly oriented toward the carriageway and the restriction it regulates.

I have taken photographs and video which demonstrate that:
* the nearest visible sign indicates restrictions Monday to Saturday only;
* no signage facing the direction of travel or parking location clearly indicates Sunday restrictions; and
* the relevant sign appears orientated away from approaching drivers, making it difficult to see from the carriageway.

Under Regulation 18 of the Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996, the authority has a duty to ensure that traffic signs are placed so that adequate information is made available to road users regarding the effect of a Traffic Regulation Order.

In addition, the Traffic Signs Manual (Chapter 3) published by the Department for Transport states that signs must be positioned so that drivers can easily see and understand the restriction before or at the time of parking. Restrictions must be clearly conveyed and not rely on drivers locating signage that is obscured, poorly orientated, or not visible from the relevant parking position.

In this case, the combination of:
* the clearly visible nearby sign indicating Monday–Saturday restrictions,
* the absence of visible signage facing the location where the vehicle was parked,
* the orientation of the relevant sign away from approaching drivers, and
* the risk posed by the road’s speed and traffic density
led me to reasonably believe that parking on Sunday morning was permitted.

Given that the relevant sign was misaligned and not facing the carriageway or the regulated length of yellow line, I submit that the restriction was not adequately conveyed and the PCN should be cancelled.

I am a long-standing resident and permit holder who made a genuine effort to comply with the restrictions. The signage arrangement at this location is misleading and does not clearly communicate the applicable restriction to motorists parking on that section of road, particularly at night and on a busy road.

I respectfully request that the council review the attached photographs and cancel this PCN on the basis that the restriction was not adequately or clearly signed and that reasonable safety considerations prevent drivers from having to inspect signage in person.

Please let me know if any further information is required.

If the council does not accept this challenge, I request:
   •   CEO notes
   •   Confirmation of the signage inspection and maintenance records for this location

I look forward to your response.

This morning I saw a Traffic Warden (CEO) issuing a PCN in the exact same location and spoke to him about the sign being turned away from the single yellow line.

He confirmed:
  • The sign should be facing the road/yellow line.
  • It’s not correctly positioned.
  • Someone must have twisted it.
  • His manager told him to follow CPZ hours (Mon–Sat).
  • When I said my PCN was on a Sunday, he said I should appeal and it should be cancelled.

I’ve also photographed all other yellow line signs nearby — they all face the carriageway except this one.

https://imgpile.com/p/W7tVKJg#4iAuESi

I’ve now submitted my appeal. Any thoughts on strengthening it further before the 28-day deadline?