Author Topic: Hackney Council - Code 23 Parked In Area Not Designated For Vehicle - Lordship Park Road  (Read 2303 times)

0 Members and 672 Guests are viewing this topic.

You may as well add in the point that the PCN does not fully describe the contravention, and London Councils says the suffix is required but is missing. 

You may as well add in the point that the PCN does not fully describe the contravention, and London Councils says the suffix is required but is missing.

Ok will do.. I've added it back in but taken out the bit about the 2007 legislation and mentioned that no suffix's were issued:


I am making representations that the contravention did not occur as I was engaged in the exempt activities of both unloading and loading, which I am disappointed you did not address following my initial challenge.

On 30th November 2025 I parked in the space to begin unloading a mattress. As you will see by my address that I live at Sandon Court, 261 Green Lanes, London, N4 2UX. This spot was the nearest available to the property as no unloading/loading bays or parking spaces are provided by Hackney council at this address. Please see the photo attached (Image1) which is of the mattress box that was being unloaded from the vehicle in the Sandon Court lift. As can be seen by the images provided by yourselves, all other parking bays were occupied and this was the only available space to pull over to start unloading.

The duration that I was parked in this bay was only as long as was necessary to unload/load the new and old mattress. As per the Civil Enforcement Handbook (https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/assets/Services-Environment/civil-enforcement-officers-handbook.pdf) Code 23, unloading/loading is an exemption.

I only stopped in the spot pictured to load/unload, and I have not stopped/parked in this motorcycle bay or any others previously, as can hopefully be verified by yourselves that I haven’t received any other PCNs from Hackney Council in the almost 3 years I’ve lived at this address.

Alongside the exempt activity that was taking place, I would also like to raise the PCN is required to state the grounds on which the enforcement authority believes that the penalty charge is payable. Those grounds must be expressed in terms that allow the recipient of the PCN to properly understand the nature of the alleged contravention.

The Council says that the place in which my vehicle was parked was a Motorcycle bay only. This is not, however, clear on the face of the PCN which states simply that the vehicle was parked in a place not designated for that class of vehicle.

As a motorist reading the PCN I do not understand due to the wording the nature of the alleged contravention because there is nothing to explain the class of vehicle for which the parking place was designated. The PCN needs to identify, whether by wording or images, that the class of vehicle for which the bay is designated is motorcycles only I therefore find that based on this that the PCN was invalid as no suffix’s were issued.

Furthermore, I would also like to add to this representation that due to the direction in which I approached this spot I did initially see the motorcycle sign and there is a lack of a road legend for the bay (Image2), this makes it unclear due to there being two spaces that look exactly the same for motor vehicles right next to it. It is clear that the council is inconsistent in clearly marking motorcycle bays to bring their status unambiguously to drivers' attention. Especially as the bay near to this is has a clear road legend for Electric Vehicles (Image3)

In Summary, my main challenge in this representation regarding this PCN is that I was engaging in exempt activities of unloading/loading from my vehicle which is clearly demonstrated due to my close proximity to my registered property and images of the unloading taking place. Along with this, I am unclear on why this PCN was issued due to the lack of information and suffix's that were provided when this PCN was issued.



You may as well add in the point that the PCN does not fully describe the contravention, and London Councils says the suffix is required but is missing.

Evening, I've finally had a reply following my representation. The response is below:



I'm debating now taking this to a tribunal as I was under the impression that unloading/loading is an exemption which has been acknowledged in this letter.

As ever, any advice appreciated.

Well, they don't actually state that loading is an exemption, just that they note your reps stating you were unloading. Your case hinges on whether loading/unloading from a vehicle that is not a M/c is an exemption in the m/c parking bay. The Traffic Order is the document that defines what is allowed.

Also, your reps were an informal challenge against the paper PCN, and all London councils game the system ruthlessly and reject virtually all informal reps knowing that most people then just cough-up to get the discount. I call them "Fob Off" letters. So if you are prepared to stand your ground, you must wait for the Notice to Owner, sent to the name and address on the V5C for the vehicle. So, is this your vehicle, and is the V5C Registration Certificate up-to-date ?
« Last Edit: February 27, 2026, 11:38:57 pm by Incandescent »

Well, they don't actually state that loading is an exemption, just that they note your reps stating you were unloading. However, your case hinges on whether loading/unloading is an exemption in the m/c parking bay. Is it an exemption in other parking bays ? The Traffic Order is the document that defines what is allowed.

Thank you Incandescent for your response. Looking on the Civil Enforcement Officers Handbook, on page 29 (https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/assets/Services-Environment/civil-enforcement-officers-handbook.pdf)

It does state that if a Code 23 is issued (which it was in this case), loading/unloading is allowed.

If I'm missing something here please do let me know and thanks again. 

I've updated my last post

Well, they don't actually state that loading is an exemption, just that they note your reps stating you were unloading. Your case hinges on whether loading/unloading from a vehicle that is not a M/c is an exemption in the m/c parking bay. The Traffic Order is the document that defines what is allowed.

Also, your reps were an informal challenge against the paper PCN, and all London councils game the system ruthlessly and reject virtually all informal reps knowing that most people then just cough-up to get the discount. I call them "Fob Off" letters. So if you are prepared to stand your ground, you must wait for the Notice to Owner, sent to the name and address on the V5C for the vehicle. So, is this your vehicle, and is the V5C Registration Certificate up-to-date ?

That's strange. The letter I've received is in response to my second challenge and was flagged as a formal representation. It feels like I might've been fobbed off twice. On another part of the letter that I haven't included it says my next option is to go to a tribunal whch I think I might do. Yes my V5C certificate is up-to-date so I should get all correspondence.

Sorry, missed that you had got the Notice to Owner, and sent reps against that.

OK, so if you're standing your ground the next stage is to take them to London Tribunals, but you need to be sure of your ground on whether loading is an exemption in all parking bays, incl those for m/cs. This is where the Traffic Order is key.