Free Traffic Legal Advice

Please post up both sides of the PCN. Do not redact any info.

The council's photos pl. (I've viewed them)

Having looked at Seel St. the broad yellow no stopping road marking is in place, so even if the was some ambiguity on the driver's part regarding what the traffic sign showed (I can assure you they'll be none on the council's part) what did they think this was at 8.13, an unregulated length of street?

The council's photo of the traffic sign is blurred, but photos aren't a legal requirement.

The road marking behind the car is out of place - it's an internal parking place marking in a place which has no internal divisions. But it doesn't really bear upon the issues here because the car was parked next to the no stopping line.

The other aspect which confuses me is that the post behind the car carries a one-way street sign(clear in GSV and just discernible in the council's photos)but the car is facing the wrong way...and so is the car behind in the council's photos!

Not a chance IMO re signage, it is clear enough to hear an adjudicator say substantially compliant.
If the traffic order can be tracked down there is a chance that it is flawed...this based on the sign obviously being changed to No Stopping?
Sorry, it's all I've got

And yet the one-way sign is visible and it indicates a legal requirement, which brings into question the council's administrative and organisational competence which might bear fruit...but it's a long-shot.

I must say that the presence of the dividing line with the adjacent post and traffic sign suggests that perhaps there was/is a P&D place to the left. And if you look at the far end you'll see the same sign...and what could be seen as end-bay markings. Odd.

cp has a way of getting relevant traffic orders in double-quick time, so perhaps he will be able to obtain this.

In the meantime, as per DD, I think you should make reps on the grounds that the sign was unclear. Remember, all the authority have is the CEO's notes and photos, and the photos are blurred and unreadable, so if you say that part of the sign was unreadable they couldn't know otherwise other than to look, they couldn't rely on the CEO's photos which neither confirm nor deny your assertion.

Hi there,

Sorry for the delay in responding, I've been away for a few days. Thank you so much for all of your advice. I think to begin with I'm going to go down the route of explaining that the sign was obscured, and as previously stated the evidence photos don't show an awful lot of anything.

I've never written up anything like this before, so are there any resources around for standard templates that I should follow, or an article on the forum I could take a look at?

Thanks again!

Okay, I had a crack at something. Be brutal-- but not too brutal, I have feelings

Re: Penalty Charge Notice:
Vehicle Registration:
Date of Issuance: 12th September 2023
Alleged Contravention: 45 - Parked on a Taxi Rank

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to formally appeal the Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) referenced above, which was issued to me on the 12th September 2023 at 20:13 for the alleged contravention of parking on a taxi rank. I believe that this PCN has been issued unfairly and request that it be reconsidered for the following reasons:

Unclear Signage: At the time when I parked my vehicle, I observed that the signage indicating parking regulations was unclear and illegible due to being obscured by tape and stickers. As such, it was impossible for me to ascertain the restrictions and the times displayed on the sign. I would like to emphasize that it is essential for drivers to have clear and unambiguous signage to ensure compliance with parking regulations.

Contradictory One-Way Signs: Additionally, the situation was further complicated by the presence of a contraflow arrangement in the area. This resulted in some "one-way" signs pointing in one direction while others pointed in the opposite direction. It is crucial to note that one-way signs carry legal significance and are pivotal for road users' compliance. The existence of contradictory signage raises concerns about the council's administrative and organisational competence, potentially leading to confusion among drivers.

Ambiguity of the Area: The location where I parked is evidently a pay and display area during certain times, transforming into a taxi rank during nighttime hours. However, due to the obscured sign, it was impossible for me to discern that I was within the restricted time period for parking on a taxi rank. Clarity and transparency in signage are essential to prevent inadvertent violations.

In light of the aforementioned factors, I kindly request that you review my appeal and consider the circumstances presented. I believe that, given the unclear signage and contradictory one-way signs, the penalty charge in this case should be waived.

I trust that you will give due consideration to the evidence provided and the points raised in this letter. I look forward to receiving a prompt response regarding the outcome of this appeal. Please find my contact information below for any further correspondence.

Sincerely,
My missus

Thank you so much everyone, I've just lodged the appeal. Hopefully the outcome is in her favour, but regardless I'd like to thank you all for your input and wisdom. It's greatly appreciated

I'll be sure to leave an update on this thread once we know the outcome.

Thanks,
Dave