The contravention description is:
'Failing to proceed in the direction shown by the arrow on a blue sign..'
It is not proceeding in the wrong direction along Shaftesbury, this is simply the concomitant of failing to proceed in the direction shown by the arrow.
IMO, your reps should be along the lines of:
On *** I was driving south along Hawthorne Avenue and turned left at its junction with Shaftesbury Road. This is confirmed by the authority's CCTV. I was not aware at the time that I had done anything wrong and therefore was surprised to receive the PCN.
On viewing the authority's CCTV I was still none the wiser as with which blue direction sign I am supposed to have failed to comply . For obvious reasons it cannot be the 'one-way' arrow in the CCTV because this is not visible to drivers travelling in my direction. I then looked at Google Street View which shows a single blue sign with a white arrow on a lamp post on the opposite side of the road at the junction of Hawthorne Avenue and Shaftesbury. I presume this is the 'arrow on a blue sign' referred to in the contravention description as there is no other regulatory sign in the vicinity.
I am therefore making representations on the grounds that the contravention did not occur because the council has failed to sign the restriction to the standard required. Specifically, according to the Traffic Signs Manual (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5c78f895e5274a0ebfec719b/traffic-signs-manual-chapter-03.pdf) the council should erect a 'Right turn' sign with the supplementary plate 'One way' in combination with a sign to diagram 609 'to be sited approx. 50m from the junction'. The road marking Right Turn is an optional addition.
By placing only a single sign which sits within an environment of blue signs with white writing (MOT TEST CENTRE, the MOT symbol, AUTOTEKS) the council has done its best to obscure the sign rather than bring it to a driver's attention. As if this wasn't bad enough, the sign is placed immediately to the right of an entrance to properties which would be visited by high-sided commercial vehicles which would have to turn across the line of sight of any driver at the junction.
The authority is required to explain why it has departed from the TSM recommendation and instead chosen to place only one of the two recommended signs and none of the road markings. Absent cogent reasons, excluding lack of knowledge and for financial purposes, the PCN must be cancelled.
Thank you H C Anderson!
I run the above through chatgpt:
I wish to make formal representations against the above PCN on the grounds that the alleged contravention did not occur.
On 01/08/2025 at 10:57, I was driving south along Hawthorne Avenue and turned left at its junction with Shaftesbury Road. This is confirmed by the authority's CCTV. At the time, I was not aware that I had committed any contravention, and I was therefore surprised to receive this PCN.
Upon viewing the CCTV evidence provided by the authority, I was still unclear as to which blue directional sign I was alleged to have failed to comply with. The ‘one-way’ arrow in the footage cannot be the relevant sign, as it is not visible to drivers travelling in my direction.
I subsequently consulted Google Street View and observed a single blue sign with a white arrow mounted on a lamp post on the opposite side of the road at the junction of Hawthorne Avenue and Shaftesbury Road. I can only assume this is the sign in question, as no other regulatory blue direction signs are present nearby.
The contravention description is “failing to proceed in the direction shown by the arrow on a blue sign.” However, the Council has not signed the restriction in accordance with the Traffic Signs Manual (TSM), Chapter 3. Specifically:
Section 4 of the TSM requires that a “Right Turn” sign, with a supplementary “One Way” plate, should be erected in combination with a diagram 609 sign, to be sited approximately 50 metres before the junction.
The optional “Right Turn” road marking could also have been used to provide clarity.
By placing only a single diagram 609 sign in a visually cluttered environment—surrounded by blue commercial signs such as “MOT TEST CENTRE,” the MOT symbol, and “AUTOTEKS”—the Council has obscured rather than highlighted the restriction.
Additionally, the sign is placed immediately beside an entrance used by high-sided vehicles, which regularly obstruct the line of sight for drivers approaching the junction. This renders the sign ineffective at conveying the restriction.
The Council is required to explain why it has departed from the TSM recommendations by providing only one of the two prescribed signs and omitting advance signage or road markings. Unless the Council can provide cogent reasons for this deviation, other than lack of resources or financial motives, the restriction cannot be considered adequately signed and the contravention cannot be enforced.
For these reasons, I respectfully submit that the alleged contravention did not occur and request that the PCN be cancelled.
Yours faithfully,
[Your Name]
