Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hi I am the vehicle owner but tanother person was driving they  in unwittingly entered a resdtricted street 1 minute 45 seconds before the restrictions ended , the street was empty there were no children or other cars.   I have sent this letter but had it rejected :  Should I persure this futher if I have valid grounds and a chance of winning.
photos and pcn are here :
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1MYj0Z-ESRetjQZA6O0EwBXfx1UTWWReR?usp=sharing
Thanks so much for your help

Summary of Appeal Grounds
•   Timing: Contravention occurred at 15:58:15, less than two minutes before the restriction ended at 16:00.
•   Safety Context: Photographic evidence shows no children present at the time.
•   Fairness and Proportionality: Enforcement should reflect the intent of the law, not rigid timing where no risk exists.
•   Legal Precedent:
o   Malcolm Newman v London Borough of Hounslow (Case Ref: 2230448785) – Tribunal allowed appeal where strict enforcement conflicted with legal requirements under the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016.
o   Tribunal decisions confirm mitigating circumstances and proportionality justify cancellation.
•   Driving Record: Impeccable record and commitment to safety.
Attachments:
•   Photographs of signage
•   Confirmation of official school zone times
•   Copy of penalty notice
________________________________________
Full Appeal Letter
I am writing to formally appeal the penalty notice issued for driving in a school zone at 15:59 on [date].
The posted signage clearly states that school zone restrictions end at 16:00. The alleged offence occurred less than two minutes before the end of the restriction period, which is an exceptionally narrow margin. I was driving cautiously and within the speed limit, fully aware of the importance of these safety measures.
I strongly support the purpose of school zone regulations and have always adhered to them. However, this situation falls within a reasonable tolerance where strict enforcement may not reflect the spirit of the law, which is to protect children during active school hours. At 15:58.15, the likelihood of children being present was minimal, and the photographic evidence provided clearly shows no children were present in the vicinity.
Fairness and proportionality are key principles in enforcement. The Traffic Penalty Tribunal and London Tribunals have consistently emphasised that enforcement must align with the intent of the Traffic Management Order and signage compliance. In Malcolm Newman v London Borough of Hounslow (Case Ref: 2230448785), the adjudicator allowed the appeal because rigid enforcement did not reflect the legal requirements under the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016. This case demonstrates that where circumstances show no real safety risk and only a minimal deviation from the restriction, adjudicators have exercised discretion to cancel penalties.
Given these mitigating circumstances, I respectfully request that you reconsider this penalty. I have maintained an impeccable driving record and consistently prioritise safety. This isolated incident does not represent negligence or disregard for the rules.
Thank you for your time and understanding. I am happy to provide any further information if required.
Yours sincerely,
[Your Full Name]

 

Your appeal was off target as there is nothing in safety and whether children were about.

Instead it needed to be on the clock although beyond 1 minute it gets harder but we have seen a few appeals allowed at 2-3 minutes.

I've not looked at the signage/PCN.