Free Traffic Legal Advice

Yes there are entry signs with event days but as we know these control only single yellows.

If you park in the bay with that parking sign I do think the only conclusion you can make is it that those times are operational on that day. The only alternative IMO is that there are no restrictions on non-event days, which is a point that could be tested. 

But it could be clearer and also say 'Event day today'.

A few nonsense posts have now vanished. We all need to remember that it's not up to any of us to decide the rights and wrongs, what we have to bear in mind is, if the adjudicator asks the appellant "what's wrong with this sign ?"



there needs to be a compelling answer, not one that they can deal with by saying "I disagree and find as a fact that the contravention occurred".

Simply saying that it was impossible to know whether the sign applied or not is not going to cut it. Please let's be realistic and remember that we need to give legal advise on arguable points and on the prospects of success of those arguments, this is not a philosophical debate about the rights and wrongs of what the council has done. Further posts that ignore this will be removed without further warning.

Going back to the previous issue, clearly for the 1st April the council could say that the extended hours means people wouldn't turn up and occupy all the bays before kick-off, so the ultra-vires argument doesn't work either.

In these circumstances the best option might be the strategy of last resort, though I have come up with a few variations of it they all depend on the OP having some sort of mitigating evidence for the council to (fail to) look at.

Is me saying the sign hadn't been flipped over a poor defence?

It's arguable, as the quality of the photo from the CEO is so bad, an adjudicator might decide that he can't be sure it had been flipped. But by your own admission, you don't really recall if it was flipped or not.

... surely that can't be true, because, if what they're saying is indeed the case, the implication is that, on the days leading up to an event, people are able to park without any restrictions whatsoever?

No, if that's what they're saying the implication is that they're imposing event day restrictions on non-event days.

The only thing I can come up with is just a screenshot of GSV which I saw before I set off. Or proof of purchase at the restaurant. They probably won't bother to look at either of those things.

OK so that's something.

If I wait for the NtO, appeal and then they reject it, will they re-offer the discounted rate?

You can't appeal an NTO, you can only make a formal representation against it. They would normally reoffer the discount but you can take it as read that they will reject. It's only when you appeal to the tribunal that you get a fair hearing.

OP, pl read what you've posted.

Their NOR was sent on 7 July. Their letter dated 29 July advises you and includes a copy.

Assuming you didn't receive the original NOR, you could simply ignore the copy and wait for the process to unfold i.e. Charge Certificate, Order for Recovery, revocation order, authority referral to adjudicator and your appeal.

Or you could register an appeal now - and add procedural impropriety to what you had in your reps- and carry on. This would be quicker and you would be in control.

With a NOR dated 7 July the mandated (as opposed to the period stated in the NOR) 28 days to appeal ends on TUESDAY 5 AUGUST. 

WaIt for other views.
...but don't wait too long.

There's no discount now so may as well appeal.

It could be worth getting the traffic order. The case below suggests those CPZ entry signs could be wrong with all the dates but the case is for Newham not Haringey.

-------------

Case reference   2250234820
Appellant   
Authority   London Borough of Newham
VRM   SX64EFL
   
PCN Details
PCN   PN21502865
Contravention date   29 Dec 2024
Contravention time   09:56:00
Contravention location   Ham Park Road
Penalty amount   GBP 130.00
Contravention   Parked resident/shared use without a valid permit
   
Referral date   -
   
Decision Date   29 Jul 2025
Adjudicator   Edward Houghton
Appeal decision   Appeal allowed
Direction   cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and the Notice to Owner.
Reasons   I heard this appeal by video link.
The Appellant’s case is essentially that there was no signage in the immediate vicinity to inform her that the day in w question was an event day. This may be so. However the Council clearly relies on this information being given on Controlled Zone signage which the motorist must pass in order to reach the eventual parking place – a standard form of stadium signage.
In the present case, however, although plans have been provided together with photographs of the signs relied on, these are of very poor quality and do not clearly show either the location of the signs or the location where the vehicle parked. I am not satisfied this evidence is sufficient to prove what is needed to be proved, namely that the Appellant could not have reached her parking place without passing such a sign.
I would also add that the Secretary of State’s authorisation for the sign allows the lower panel to be varied to the “date of the next event” – not the date of the next event and the event following that.
The Appeal must therefore be allowed

You received the NOR but didn't post this here.

You then wrote to the authority - when we don't know but their reply implies that you did not acknowledge that you had received the NOR - who replied as posted.

The NOR was dated Mon. 7th July, therefore served on 9th which is day 1 of the regulatory period of 28 days whose end date is therefore 5th August, NOT 6 Aug. as the NOR states i.e. 28 days from! Hence your PI grounds.