Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hi jays86,
I assume this was for stopping on double yellow lines?
I'm no expert but you need to confirm the restrictions in "the bay" but could also try to get the Traffic Order details from the council to confirm the regulations have been properly applied
Good luck

It was personally returning some items due to their value, it took me no longer than 10 minutes, and I have a photo of the boxes that were returned in the office of where they were being returned to.

I made a single trip with the trolley, the office was on the 7th Floor, but essentially it was enter the building, collect the trolley, back to the vehicle, load the trolley, back up to the office, photograph of returned items, and then back to the car.

No guarantee but i can ask if they'll provide me with something to confirm the delivery.

Tincombe is being a tad gloomy - you only have to be credible to an adjudicator to win this at the tribunal but of course the council may well be awkward.

Only you know what you were doing.

Your credibility at adjudication would be based on the conviction of your argument when conveyed verbally. With the council, you've only got dry language on paper. Gloom or not, unless you provide something else to the council then they're 99.999% likely to reject.

So you'd be at adjudication with your conviction and determination to convey to the adjudicator that you were loading, but the full penalty would be in play.

We do see this or similar from adjudicators often: 'I found the appellant to be a credible and truthful witness and I accept that they were....'

As regards should you get a statement from your witness now or later, IMO adjudicators would expect you to present your best evidence at the representations stage.

Hi
Please see below my drafted appeal, the boxes on the trolley were the only reason I was at that location at that time.

I make formal representations against the above Penalty Charge Notice on the basis that my vehicle was engaged in a continuous unloading operation and was therefore benefiting from the loading/unloading exemption applicable to the restriction.

The vehicle was stopped on double yellow lines solely for the purpose of unloading approximately ten sealed boxes containing goods which were being returned to Nyetimber.

This was not a case of parking for convenience. The vehicle was stopped solely to facilitate the safe unloading of goods, and it departed immediately once the operation had been completed.

Background to the return

Prior to the delivery, I contacted Nyetimber to establish the correct process and location for returning the goods.

Nyetimber confirmed that I could return the items myself to their offices at:

Nyetimber
Astiсus Building
21 Palmer Street
London
SW1H 0AD

Nyetimber advised that:

"The bottles will need to be returned in pristine original condition. If any damage occurs during return transit, including cosmetic damage to the bottles, labels, foil, shield, or gift boxes - even if the boxes themselves are unopened, we may be unable to accept the return."

This was therefore not a routine delivery. The goods consisted of approximately ten boxes of high value items, and Nyetimber had specifically advised that any damage occurring during the return process could result in the return being refused.

Before arriving, I had no way of knowing whether a trolley would be available within the building. I therefore stopped as close as reasonably possible to the entrance to minimise the distance the boxes would need to be carried manually if no trolley was available, reducing unnecessary handling and the risk of damage.

Chronology of the unloading operation

Upon arrival, I immediately entered the building to establish the arrangements for safely completing the return.

The building manager/receptionist informed me that Nyetimber had a trolley available and advised that I needed to collect it from the seventh floor.

I proceeded directly to the seventh floor, collected the trolley, returned directly to my vehicle, transferred all of the boxes onto the trolley, secured the vehicle, and immediately transported the goods into the building.

The goods were then taken directly to Nyetimber's seventh-floor office using the building's lifts and handed over to the appropriate recipient.

Given both the value of the goods and Nyetimber's express instructions regarding their condition, it would not have been appropriate to leave the boxes unattended in a reception area or communal lobby.

Following the handover, I took photographs of the boxes inside Nyetimber's office as evidence that the return had been successfully completed. I then returned immediately to my vehicle and departed.

At no stage was the vehicle left while I undertook any unrelated activity. Every action undertaken (entering the building, obtaining the trolley, transporting the goods, completing the handover, documenting the delivery and returning to the vehicle) formed part of one continuous unloading operation.

Evidence of the continuous unloading operation

The PCN records that the vehicle was first seen and the Penalty Charge Notice was issued at:

11:45 on Wednesday 15 July 2026.

The Civil Enforcement Officer's photographs show only that the vehicle was unattended at street level. However, that is entirely consistent with a genuine unloading operation of this nature.

The unloading process required me to leave the vehicle temporarily because I was required to transport approximately ten boxes into the building, collect and use a trolley, and deliver the goods to Nyetimber's seventh-floor office.

My photographs taken during the delivery show the returned goods inside Nyetimber's seventh-floor office at 11:45am, the same minute that the PCN records the vehicle as first seen.

These photographs provide direct evidence that the unloading operation was actively taking place at the time of the alleged contravention. The fact that the vehicle was unattended does not indicate that it was parked; it was unattended because I was carrying out the necessary steps to complete the unloading operation.

The CEO's observations were therefore limited to the vehicle's location and could not capture the exempt loading activity taking place inside the building.

Why the duration was reasonable

The vehicle remained stationary only for the minimum period reasonably necessary to complete the unloading operation.

The time required was directly attributable to:

locating the recipient and establishing the return arrangements;
collecting the trolley from the seventh floor;
transferring approximately ten boxes from the vehicle onto the trolley;
transporting the goods by lift to the seventh-floor office;
completing the handover;
recording evidence of delivery; and
returning directly to the vehicle.

No part of this period involved any unrelated activity.

Evidence enclosed

I enclose the following evidence in support of these representations:

Photographs showing the returned boxes inside Nyetimber's seventh-floor office, including timestamps.
Email correspondence with Nyetimber confirming the return address and arrangements.
Nyetimber's instructions regarding the requirement for the goods to be returned in pristine condition.

This evidence demonstrates that the vehicle was stopped solely for the purpose of a genuine unloading operation and remained stationary for no longer than was reasonably necessary.

In the circumstances, I respectfully request that the Penalty Charge Notice be cancelled.

Sorry, how about this for a condensed version?

I am making formal representations against this Penalty Charge Notice on the basis that my vehicle was engaged in a continuous, permitted unloading operation. The vehicle was stopped briefly to return ten boxes of fragile, high-value goods to the Nyetimber offices at the Asticus Building, 21 Palmer Street. As Nyetimber had explicitly required the bottles to be returned in pristine condition and advised that damage could result in the return being refused, it was practically necessary to stop as close to the building as possible to minimise handling and the risk of damage.

The entire delivery process was rapid and uninterrupted. Upon arrival, I entered the building and was advised that Nyetimber had a trolley available on the 7th floor. I collected the trolley as instructed, returned immediately to the vehicle to load the boxes, and transported them directly back to the office for handover. The PCN records the vehicle as first seen and issued at 11:45 on 15 July 2026; my enclosed photographs show the goods safely inside the 7th-floor office at approximately this same time, demonstrating that the vehicle was unattended only because I was completing this active unloading operation inside the building.

I enclose photographs of the completed delivery alongside the prior correspondence confirming the return arrangements. As the vehicle was being used solely for a genuine and continuous unloading operation, I respectfully request that this Penalty Charge Notice be cancelled.