There are two photos of the OP's vehicle, one with a dashed white line appearing from under the front and one with an equally clear solid white line disappearing under the rear.
The focus on the advisory nature of the former rather ignores the existence of the mandatory nature of the latter.
OP, whether you were working or not is not an issue, you may not park on a mandatory cycle lane, and the evidence shows you were.
This might only have been marginal, the photos don't show other landmarks clearly enough to claim. If it was marginal, then an adjudicator could disregard, but it's a gamble.
