Author Topic: Ealing PCN - 53J restriction on vehicles entering a pedestrian zone - Allenby Rd Southall & Oldfield Ln South Greenford  (Read 1698 times)

0 Members and 8 Guests are viewing this topic.

I received 2 PCNs for the same contravention within 13 mins of each other on the same day, travelling through an area I have never driven through. Total amount is £320 for driving down a regular road on a Monday morning (the only time I could make the journey due to working full time).
Both PCNs state the name of the road and are for entering a restricted pedestrian zone. Neither states an exact location, just the name of a long road. Both have a tiny, dark thumbnail showing my car travelling along a normal road for cars.

PCN 1 (Greenford):


PCN 2 (Southall):


I have never even heard of the 'restriction on entering a pedestrian zone' contravention before this and am still not 100% clear on what it is or how to identify it in future.
I understand certain roads near schools become 'pedestrian zones' at certain times, but the roads remain open and look exactly like a road. There may be a sign somewhere with small text, but no actual road traffic sign in a red circle to show you cannot enter.

I cannot find the signs on the 2 roads in Google maps. I have tried to view the evidence online on the official Ealing council PCN portal, but I get an error and clicking on the link they emailed me only opens a blank webpage. So I cannot see where it was, what I did or what kind of sign was there.

I had no idea there was a school in that area, or that there were restrictions or what days or times they would apply.

I think the sign may be in the corner of the dark thumbnails on the PCN, but I can't read it (too small), and it strikes me that would not be readable from a moving vehicle in traffic, especially if turning left into the road. It was also a dark morning, raining and I had my windscreen wipers on. In one photo there is a van on my inside between my car and the sign, so not sure I would have even seen it.

Do I have any case for appealing and not paying?

This feels like pure robbery.

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


See the 1st link in my profile.
I REGRET THAT, FOR THE PRESENT, I AM UNABLE TO TAKE ON ANY MORE CASES AS A REPRESENTATIVE AT THE LONDON TRIBUNALS. THIS IS FOR BOTH PERSONAL AND LEGAL REASONS. PLEASE DO NOT PM ME UNLESS YOU HAVE POSTED YOUR THREAD ON THE FORUM AND I WILL ATTEMPT TO GIVE ADVICE.


If you do not challenge, you join "The Mugged Club".

cp8759 and mrmustard are true geniuses. I know my place in the hierarchy of The Three Musketeers. 😊 "The Clinician", "The Gentleman" and "The Showman"

There are "known knowns" which we may never have wished to know. This applies to them. But in the field the idea that there are also "unknown unknowns" doesn't apply as they hide in the aleatoric lottery. I know this is true and need to be prepared knowing the "unknown unknowns" may well apply.

To Socrates from "Hippocrates"

I have also had the exact same PCNS for the same locations, like you I also not know the area and don't understand legal jargon.

I am not sure how to appeal the claim.

I have also had the exact same PCNS for the same locations, like you I also not know the area and don't understand legal jargon.

I am not sure how to appeal the claim.
Please start your own thread.
I REGRET THAT, FOR THE PRESENT, I AM UNABLE TO TAKE ON ANY MORE CASES AS A REPRESENTATIVE AT THE LONDON TRIBUNALS. THIS IS FOR BOTH PERSONAL AND LEGAL REASONS. PLEASE DO NOT PM ME UNLESS YOU HAVE POSTED YOUR THREAD ON THE FORUM AND I WILL ATTEMPT TO GIVE ADVICE.


If you do not challenge, you join "The Mugged Club".

cp8759 and mrmustard are true geniuses. I know my place in the hierarchy of The Three Musketeers. 😊 "The Clinician", "The Gentleman" and "The Showman"

There are "known knowns" which we may never have wished to know. This applies to them. But in the field the idea that there are also "unknown unknowns" doesn't apply as they hide in the aleatoric lottery. I know this is true and need to be prepared knowing the "unknown unknowns" may well apply.

To Socrates from "Hippocrates"

I challenged the 2 PCNs on the grounds that the signs were obstructed or not readable from a vehicle and also that I am penalised for the same contravention twice within 10 mins. It said 30 working days to get a response. It's now been over 40 working days. Is there a limit by when these cases timeout?

@Hippocrates I clicked your profile but not sure which link you are referring to.

I challenged the 2 PCNs on the grounds that the signs were obstructed or not readable from a vehicle and also that I am penalised for the same contravention twice within 10 mins. It said 30 working days to get a response. It's now been over 40 working days. Is there a limit by when these cases timeout?

When did you submit the appeals?


I challenged the 2 PCNs on the grounds that the signs were obstructed or not readable from a vehicle and also that I am penalised for the same contravention twice within 10 mins. It said 30 working days to get a response. It's now been over 40 working days. Is there a limit by when these cases timeout?
There is no limit under the LLA & TfL Act 2003 on the time the enforcing authority has to respond to representations, but there is a common law duty on them to act fairly and expeditiously. Adjudicators at London Tribunals regard responses over 3 calendar months as unfair and potential grounds for cancellation.

Ealing council has now responded to my appeal. 53 working days after I sent my representation by email.

They have rejected both appeals: 2 tickets for the same violation 13 mins apart.

The grounds for rejection are:
- They believe the signs are compliant 2016 Traffic Signs Regulations. They have not addressed that there was a massive van blocking the sign and encroaching into my lane where I had to go into the opposite lane to get around it, right at the point where I should have been passing the sign behind the van. This is clearly shown in their video, but they did not even acknowledge it in their response.
- They sympathise with my situation, but have to enforce all contraventions in a far and consistent manner and cancellation would set a precedent to other motorists. i.e. No matter what I say happened in the appeal, they will ignore it anyway so they can continue to fine everybody. To me this undermines the principle of 'appeals that are considered based on their specific circumstance.'
- The above includes the double penalty on the same stretch of road for the same thing. Cancelling one would set a precedent. It should indeed set a precedent. They should not be double fining anyone for the same thing within a reasonable window. This opens up the possibility of putting up 100 signs every 1 km and unlimited fines.

The sign in question has 10 lines of information. Chat GPT tells me all road signs should be easily readable within 2 seconds. I don't know how I would read that sign safely whilst keeping my eyes on the road or within 2 seconds.
Chat GPT also found this research on road signs:

Human Factors Research (Important Point)
Studies used in traffic engineering show:
Drivers process symbols faster than words
Each additional line increases processing time
Multi-clause instructions significantly reduce comprehension at speed
Older drivers require longer reading times
So while 2–3 short lines may be fine, paragraph-style text is not considered appropriate for drivers in motion.

The penalties are £160 each so £320 in total for driving down a normal public road, very safely and responsible (apart from missing the wordy signs of course). This reduces by 50% if I pay in the next week or so. Obviously I feel I haven't done anything deliberate, wrong, dangerous or irresponsible. I've just been inadvertently caught out, and the double penalty feels especially harsh.

I need some advice at this point: Is this worth taking further or should I just pay? Is there any chance I would win if I appeal to London Tribunals? Even if I overturn one of the penalties I have to pay the full £160 on the other one, so it would just be a more time consuming way to get to the same end result.

I'm also reading that 10 lines of text is considered 3-4 seconds of reading time and that conditions such as days or times restrictions apply increases the processing time as you would need to read, process and then check the time. Thus such a sign would fail the 'safely reading at a glance test'.

Placing these directly on the corner of a junction where you will have cars turning in or coming out and demanding your attention is also not good practice, especially if the path or size of the vehicles can easily block direct line of sight to the sign.

So on this thread you go through a lot of text on the signs and their unreadability by a driver in a moving car, yet looking through, I see no photos of these signs nor any GSV link to the locations. How can we advise on something we can't see ?