Free Traffic Legal Advice

https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/mobile/folders/1ewl9eHh2MJG00VYg_pMpm86BtY5Sh58h?usp=sharing

See the Google Docs link above that includes the issued PCN and my appeal.
We received 3 PCN's for this place and I appealed them all with essentially the same appeal.

They have rejected the appeal for two of them one of them was rejected 3 weeks ago today. I'm wondering what my chances are at the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. The lack of the prohibited class of vehicle being specified on the notice appears to be a winning point at Tribunal alone. At least at the London Tribunals. It also does not specify it on the online portal, and the evidence photos and video do not show the prohibition sign and the restricted  type of vehicle. In fact the sign shown in the videos and photos being passed by the vehicle is a totally irrelevent toundabout ADS sign: https://maps.app.goo.gl/a2NbnK9Hj2gjCgGr7

The second point is the roundabout here: https://maps.app.goo.gl/8w1yM9wa6pFVDyK66

The restricted area starts on Hanger Hill Road and Ends on Brooklands Road. The TSM says the restriction diagram should be on the roundabout ADS or if not possible, on a diagram 818.4 sign placed before (upstream of) the roundabout ADS. But this has neither. The roundabout is quite small and narrow, so by the time the signage is seen for the Hanger Hill exit, the vehicle is commited to to the manoeuvre.

Notice of Rejection - https://drive.google.com/file/d/18jemN939y5puQIpwdDnFS-adn7Xby-rk/view

NoR also fails to specify the prohibited class of vehicle.

They must have only recently started enforcing this restriction, as when I informed the traffic controllers and drivers there were a few drivers who said they had been doing this route delivering to a site on Avro Way, Brooklands Business Park, for years and believed the site was within the restricted zone. It isn't. But there is no restriction end signs. Considering the zone includes 4 or 5 roads, perhaps there should be. This was a point I made in my second and third appeals.

The drivers that got the PCNs simply got caught out by the signage on that roundabout.

They must have only recently started enforcing this restriction

IMO, the PCN rather shouts this at you with more 'procedural improprieties' than you can shake a stick at.

What a car crash of a notice!

Oh yeah i completely forgot, they sent a Warning Notice for this restriction like a month or two before these PCNs and I made the council aware of the exact issues I raised in my appeal. Mainly, failing to acually specify what restriction they are trying to warn us of in their warning letter lol and the signage issues.

I havent looked to closely at the wording of the PCN and such, so I'd be interested to know what other defects you noticed.

Okay, I have appealed that first one. The other two are basically identical.

I added in those points you mentioned including the repeated use of "28 days from the date of service" instead of "28 days beginning with the date on which the PCN is served".

I also included the fettering of discretion in the use of "will" over rather than "may".

For the NoR I included the use of the word "delivery" rather than "service" and use of the phrase "after 28 days".

The comments regarding costs seems to be same across councils outside London, I had a look at a Slough Council and a Lancashire County Council NoR I had, and the wording is the same. I'm not saying it's right, it's just an observation.

Anyway, that's one down, two more to go, and I have a London Tribunal this afternoon so that'll be fun!