Free Traffic Legal Advice

received three pcns! (maybe more in the post) for entering into this zone. This is a school zone that has restricted hours of entry. I always use this route daily after 4 pm when access is permitted, however on these particular days i had a change in my work schedule and left earlier, thereby entering into the zone when it was operational.

Because i always go down this road, i didn't realize that i am entering the road at a restricted time. my issue is that i this relay unfair. Human nature is that if you see something on a regular basis it is very likely that one will not notice it up anymore, as there is no actual change on the signage at the hours that the zone is active, thereby rendering the sign is basically invisible... ( local residents have subsequently put up flashing lights which are turned on when prohibition is in case and i have heard that people are lobbing the council to put flashing lights on the actual signs to show when zone is active but until then anyone in the circumstances as me will most probably not notice the signs...)

There maybe an argument that signage is difficult to be noticed when coming from Heathland road and making a right into Fairholt road.. see street view below..

any hope of appealing on this? any other help will be greatly appreciated.

thanks










[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

planning to appeal on the below. any advice?
on a legal basis: the sign on fairholt road was at the time of the offence on a 90 degree angle facing fairholt road. this makes it unseeable when driving from heathland road as the driver would be facing exactly opposite the side edge of the sign (this could clearly be seen so on the cctv). it should be on a slant so it could be viewed from heathland and fairholt together. the other sign at heathland road is not in the eyesight path of drivers standing at the junction, because drivers are expected to look at the road they are about to enter and not on the side of the road they are leaving.... so basically these signs as they are placed do not give adequate notice to drivers.
many thanks

hi HC

tnx for your post. dates of contraventions are 1) 06 12 23, 2) 07 12 23, 3) 11 12 23, 4)12 12 23. the first PCN arrived after the 12th. i will go back and check the point you raise. meanwhile this is the copy of the my representation..

"On-line challenge for QZ15318718
On the grounds of:
The contravention did not occur
Reason:
The restriction that I am supposed to have ignored was not signed
Further explanation :
i wish to challenge this PNC on a legal ground and on a moral ground. i use this road everyday after 4pm, however
these few days because of the hanuka festival i left my job earlier hence i passed through at 3-4 pm. because i drive
this route daily it is not possible for me to notice the sign prohibiting this certain time. i am sure you agree that human
nature is such that something that is the same it becomes invisible! if there would only be signs there at the specific
time or there would be a change on the signage (like flashing lights etc) at the prohibited hour then this would make it
aware for all. i got four tickets for this on these days at hope you will agree that this is highly unfair (i will copy/paste this
on all the PCN's~). i never would pass the street then but i honestly didnt register that on these few days i passed
earlier than usual..

on a legal basis: the sign on fairholt road was at the time of the offence on a 90 degree angle facing
fairholt road. this makes it unseeable when driving from heathland road as the driver would be facing exactly opposite
the side edge of the sign (this could clearly be seen so on the cctv). it should be on a slant so it could be viewed from
heathland and fairholt together. the other sign at heathland road is not in the eyesight path of drivers standing at the
junction, because drivers are expected to look at the road they are about to enter and not on the side of the road they
are leaving.... so basically these signs as they are placed do not give adequate notice to drivers. many thanks"

although i first argue i "forgot" the second argument is that HAD THE SIGNS BEEN CORRECTLY POSTED I MIGHT HAVE SEEN THEM..

hi

i now have to decide whether to appeal against the remaining one. pls see attached picture/video. The sign on fairholt road facing driver coming from heathland road is not visible (originally i believe the sign was at 45 degrees so it could be seen from both streets but it has been turned by locals to a 90 degree angle ..),

the other sign at heathland road is 
a) at the side of the road so is not visible through the front windscreen and also is not very visible from side window too (depending on height of driver/seat..) and b) even if it is visible through the side window, is it in the correctly positioned? drivers approaching fairholt road are expected to focus on the road they are turning into and not on signs that are on the side of the road that are about to leave??



[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

They cannot reinstate cancelled PCNs.

@jfred please post the remaining pages of the notice of rejection for QZ15318718, and please post them properly rather than as attachments (see the guidance here).

Here's the council video:



You aren't "granted" an appeal, an appeal is a statutory right. But have you requested a hearing? You definitely don't want a decision on the papers as that can end in disaster.

I agree the signage at the junction is awful:



Lastly there's the question of whether you want to represent yourself, or whether you'd rather have one of us represent you at the hearing.

I have dropped you a PM, in the meantime here is The Hackney (Prescribed Routes and 20 MPH Speed Limit) (Amendment No.57) Order 2022.

Well done. And to the OP: congratulations on not joining The Mugged Club and staying the course.