Free Traffic Legal Advice

Council: Newham
Contravention: Failing to comply with 29j one way restriction, Stafford Road E7.

Basically they got me reversing out of a one way, which is fine. However, these cameras were installed for the purposes of enforcing healthy street zones.
I am trying to research, and came here, if the council have (and need) a TRO for enforcing this type of contravention when they had initially installed the cameras for the purposes of school zones.

I might be better off paying it if they do not.

I am at the stage of submitting a formal appeal. They did not give me a chance to make an informal appeal, and sent me a webcode with my first notice.

https://ibb.co/0pLTtwxY
https://ibb.co/zhf0787c

I'm not sure where you get this idea of an "informal appeal" from. For a PCN served at the road side, the recipient of it, (who may not be the owner), can submit an "informal challenge". With moving traffic contraventions, you get a postal PCN, and can then submit a formal representation against it, or pay the discount, there is no challenge stage.
The date of the PCN is 10th Oct, so the discount period has finished, but it is very likely that if you submit a formal representation on their website, that they will re-offer the discount if they reject your reps.

So submit some reps asap, and we'll look at the video if it's available to see if you have any statutory grounds for a cancellation.

Video Link here:

I don't think we are aware of a condition that CCTV has to be authorised only for one contravention and anyway I'm not sure what status CCTV has with these contraventions - I know there have been challenges for bus lane cameras.

Our member Hippo will probably know.

On the contravention I think an adjudicator would say you couldn't have been placed there without knowing the one way arrows you'd driven past.

I've submitted a formal appeal, I may pay this but just want to see if they'll let on if I have any room to appeal at tribunals.
I sent the following:


Hello,

I am writing to formally challenge the issuance of this PCN on the basis of procedural irregularity and non-compliance with statutory guidance concerning the enforcement of moving traffic contraventions.

The camera used in this instance was installed under the Healthy School Streets (HSS) initiative, a scheme which was publicly introduced as targeting traffic during specified school-related hours. At no stage was it communicated to residents that this camera would be used to enforce additional moving traffic contraventions (MTCs), such as one-way restrictions, beyond the original purpose of the scheme.

It is critical that enforcement measures - particularly those involving automated surveillance and civil penalties — are introduced transparently and lawfully. In this case this includes:
• Clearly informing the public when a camera’s enforcement scope is being expanded
• Ensuring the use of the device aligns with the requirements set out in the Traffic Management Act 2004
• Adhering to the Department for Transport’s statutory guidance on the roll-out of MTC enforcement, including the use of a six-month warning notice period for first-time contraventions at newly enforced camera sites - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/bus-lane-and-moving-traffic-enforcement-outside-london/traffic-management-act-2004-statutory-guidance-for-local-authorities-outside-london-on-civil-enforcement-of-bus-lane-and-moving-traffic-contravention?utm_source=chatgpt.com

In this case:
• The camera enforcement at this location began on or around 1 March 2025
• I received a PCN on 13th October 2025 without any prior warning or notification
• There was no indication, signage, or correspondence to suggest that this camera was now being used to enforce MTCs such as a one-way restriction
• The Council has not, to my knowledge, provided public notice of the transition from Healthy School Streets-only enforcement to general MTC enforcement at this site

I am requesting:
1. Confirmation that the Council formally notified the public that the HSS-installed camera would be used for MTC enforcement, along with the evidence of such notices
2. Evidence that a warning notice period was observed in accordance with DfT guidance, Newham council has a tendency to prosecute first and ask questions later.
3. Clarification on whether the Council considers enforcement without such warning — using a camera publicly designated for a separate scheme — to be consistent with its duties under the Traffic Management Act 2004

The absence of clear public communication and proper warning undermines the legitimacy of this enforcement action. I respectfully request that the PCN be cancelled and await a formal response to the points raised above.

Please do address my points along with evidence that would allow me to judge this PCN as lawful, otherwise I as I often do where there is ambiguity I will take this to London Tribunals, as Newham Council does not have a good track record of being fair to its motorists.

Kind regards,