Thanks Hippocrates, so is this okay to submit:
Dear Sir or Madam
Re: Enforcement Notice – PCN GX33149185
Vehicle Registration: TRL1P
I make these formal representations against the Enforcement Notice on the grounds that the alleged contravention did not occur and that there has been a procedural impropriety.
Firstly, I ask that my initial challenge against the Penalty Charge Notice be treated as incorporated into these formal representations. I rely upon all of the points raised therein. TfL's rejection letter does not properly address the procedural improprieties identified, but merely asserts that the signage complies with the relevant legislation.
The alleged contravention did not occur
TfL has failed to produce evidence that my vehicle passed the prescribed bus lane entry sign (diagram 958 or 959).
The rejection letter merely states that the signage complies with the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016. That is simply an assertion and is not evidence.
Having reviewed the CCTV footage, it does not show my vehicle passing either a diagram 958 or diagram 959 bus lane entry sign before the alleged contravention. Likewise, the still photographs contained within the Penalty Charge Notice do not show any such signage.
I therefore put TfL to strict proof that the prescribed bus lane entry sign was present, lawful, clearly visible and actually passed by my vehicle before the alleged contravention occurred.
Procedural impropriety
I continue to rely upon the procedural improprieties identified in my original challenge, including in particular:
- the statement that an Enforcement Notice will "automatically" be issued, which fetters the authority's discretion where the legislation provides that an Enforcement Notice may be issued;
- the misleading wording concerning correspondence before the Enforcement Notice and the right of appeal; and
- the failure to properly consider the matters raised in my initial challenge.
CCTV evidence
Although I requested the CCTV evidence promptly, it was supplied only on DVD.
In 2026, it is unreasonable to expect a motorist to possess or obtain DVD playback equipment simply to examine the evidence relied upon by the enforcement authority. This unnecessarily hindered my ability to review the evidence and prepare my case. TfL could easily have provided the footage via an online viewing portal or downloadable electronic
For the reasons set out above, TfL has failed to discharge the burden of proving the alleged contravention.
Accordingly, I respectfully request that the Enforcement Notice and the underlying Penalty Charge Notice be cancelled.
Yours faithfully
