Case reference 2250451308
Appellant xxxxxx
Authority London Borough of Islington
VRM LM15MZL
PCN Details
PCN IZ35588904
Contravention date 06 Jun 2025
Contravention time 18:41:00
Contravention location Roman Way
Penalty amount GBP 160.00
Contravention Parked resident/shared use without a valid permit
Referral date -
Decision Date 08 Jan 2026
Adjudicator Chez Cotton
Appeal decision Appeal allowed
Direction cancel the Penalty Charge Notice.
Reasons Introduction
1. The Appellant challenges a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) issued for being parked in a resident/shared use bay without a valid permit (Code 12).
2. This a postal appeal.
The Appellant’s case
3. The Appellant’s case is that the signage in place is inadequate. The Appellant noted the general restrictions operating Monday to Friday and parked accordingly. The Appellant discounted the additional restrictions on a ‘Match Day’ as it was 6 June, and so outside of the football season.
4. In these circumstances the Appellant asks for the PCN to be cancelled.
Enforcement Authority’s Case
5. The Enforcement Authority (EA) rely on photographic evidence to show the contravention occurred. A plan of a Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) area with the addition of ‘next match Fri 6, Sat 7 Jun’ added at the bottom has also been provided. The EA says this shows the restriction is signed and clear, and, further, enforceable under a valid Traffic Management Order (TMO), a copy of which is provided.
6. The EA has considered the Appellant's representations. The EA state, ‘While the appellant states that the contravention occurred outside of football season, all drivers should be aware that much day restrictions can be implemented when there is a large crowd of people expected to attend the stadium. The controls that are put in place, are for events and not just matches. In this case clear signage had been placed to indicate to drivers that much day controls were in place.’
7. The EA does not wish to exercise their discretion.
8. The EA maintain the PCN was correctly issued.
Findings and Conclusion
9. I have considered the evidence of both parties carefully.
10. Based on the photographic evidence footage provided, and additional evidential materials from the EA, I am satisfied the Appellant’s vehicle was in the relevant location, at the relevant time. I am further satisfied that if a contravention has occurred, it is enforceable by way of a valid Traffic Management Order, which I have seen.
11. The question I must decide relates to whether the signage in place was substantially compliant, clear and adequate. In this respect I note the signage at the relevant location refers to ‘Match day only – additional controls’. On balance, I consider a reasonably conscientious motorist would understand this to mean a football match, given the proximity to Arsenal Emirates. While I consider it might be argued that ‘event day’, incorporates a match, I am not persuaded that the reverse is true. On balance, I reject the EA’s argument that ‘match day’ reasonably incorporates ‘events and matches.’
12. I move to the EA’s point that it is the CPZ signage that is the primary source of information for a motorist, and that this is updated to show the next event day. In relation to the photograph of the signage provided, I note that underneath the CPZ circular icon, there are four additional information plates, each containing different restriction times and days. On balance, I find the addition of a small sign setting out the next match date, underneath three already dense information plates, to be inadequate to warn a reasonably conscientious motorist.
13. Further, the EA has provided no information as to the location of the CPZ in relation to where the Appellant’s vehicle is parked, or any evidence that the Appellant might have seen a CPZ sign in any event.
14. For the reasons outlined, on balance, I do not find the relevant signage to be substantially compliant, clear and adequate.
15. For these reasons I find a contravention did not occur and the PCN has not been validly issued.
Decision
16. The appeal is allowed.
