Below is the published decision. Is it the same location but wrong case?
You need to call the tribunal and point out the mistake and ask for the correct case to be posted assuming it has been heard.
I think you could ask for a review if you were deprived of the opportunity to put your case if it's their fault.
------------
Case Details
Case reference 2250086439
Appellant Ashraf Hussain
Authority London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham
VRM FE08OAY
PCN Details
PCN HZ90107088
Contravention date 22 Dec 2024
Contravention time 15:59:00
Contravention location Imperial Road NWbound - NW of Fulmead Street
Penalty amount GBP 130.00
Contravention Fail comply prohibition on certain types vehicle
Referral date -
Decision Date 29 Apr 2025
Adjudicator Henry Michael Greenslade
Appeal decision Appeal refused
Direction Full penalty charge notice amount stated to be paid within 28 days.
Reasons
This personal hearing was scheduled to take place via MS Teams.
However, neither party attended or was represented, either in vision, by telephone, or in person.
As previously explained, in such circumstances the Adjudicator will determine the appeal on the basis of the evidence previously produced by the parties.
A contravention can occur if a vehicle is driven so as to fail to comply with a prohibition on certain vehicles.
There appears to be no dispute that the vehicle was at this location, as shown in the closed-circuit television (cctv) images produced by the Enforcement Authority.
The vehicle is seen to pass the sign which, as the evidence clearly shows, indicates that, except for buses, taxis and permit holders, all motor vehicles are prohibited at all times.
The Appellant’s case is that the road leads to his doctor’s surgery which requires access and Google Maps took me down the road to the surgery car park. The adds that the traffic signs were contradicted by the fact that there were cars parked up and down the road.
Parking restrictions are different for those applying to moving vehicles entering the road. The Enforcement Authority also submit that non-resident can reach any property in the area without needing to go through a control point.
I accept that this may have been a genuine mistake by the Appellant but, unfortunately, that does not of itself amount to a valid ground of appeal as it does remain the responsibility of the motorist to check carefully at all times whilst driving their vehicle, so as to ensure that they do so only as permitted. This includes making sure that they comply with all restrictions and prohibitions indicated by the signs.
The sign, on each side of the carriageway, is that prescribed by Diagram 619 at Item 12 in Part 2 of Schedule 3 to the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016, as indicating ‘Motor vehicles prohibited’. The sign is illustrated in the current edition of the Official Highway Code.
Any satellite navigation system (satnav) may be a useful driving aid but it cannot take precedence over the rules of the road.
The penalty charge is £130. The amount of the penalty charge is set by the Transport, Environment and Planning Committee of London Councils and approved by the Mayor of London with the authority of the Secretary of State. Under Section 4(
(a)(iv) and 4(10) of the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003 the enforcement authority must accept the reduced penalty of £65 if paid within 14 days of the date of the Penalty Charge Notice. This is different from some other types of Penalty Charge Notice, where the relevant date is service. Once this period has expired and, for whatever reason including appealing to the Adjudicator and/or making representations to the authority, the charge remains unpaid then the full penalty becomes due.
Section 4(18) of the 2003 Act provides that in determining, for the purposes of any provision of the Act, whether a penalty charge has been paid before the end of a particular period, it shall be taken to be paid when it is received by the authority concerned.
The Enforcement Authority did, in exercise of their discretion, reoffer the reduced penalty period in their Notice of Rejection and whilst I note all that the Appellant says regarding the circumstances, the Adjudicator is only able to decide an appeal by making findings of fact on the basis of the evidence actually produced by the parties and applying relevant law. The Court of Appeal has affirmed that the Adjudicator has no power to consider mitigating circumstances of any description, including reducing the amount of the full penalty charge.
Applications for time to pay the Penalty Charge Notice must be addressed to the Enforcement Authority direct.
Considering all the evidence before me carefully I must find as a fact that, on this particular occasion, a contravention did occur and the Penalty Charge Notice was properly issued.
Accordingly, this appeal must be refused.
