Author Topic: LB of Newham, code 11u parked without payment in p&d bay, off Romford Rd/Greenhill Grove  (Read 563 times)

0 Members and 254 Guests are viewing this topic.

Hi,

My vehicle received a yellow ticket (PCN) from London Borough of Newham on Sat 9th November @ 12:55pm, the reason stated as parking without payment in a P&D bay. They've claimed that the "signage" states that the parking restrictions apply from "Mon-Sat 9am-5pm".

I don't think this is correctly applied as the sign closest to the vehicle states "Mon-Fri 9am-5pm", so there would be no need for the driver to pay online for a P&D ticket. The sign given as evidence for the contravention is actually 3-4 bays away from the spot the vehicle was parked in, and I don't see how it is clear how that sign would apply to this bay.

I'm thinking to make a challenge stating the signage is unclear and ambiguous, and so possibly doesn't comply with the Traffic Signs and General Directions 2016 act. The road markings don't make sense as there is a wheelchair symbol on the marked bay on the right (see Google Street link). Also, the CEO seems to make it out the "Mon-Sat 9am-5pm" sign is directly in front of my vehicle, which in itself is very misleading. 

I will attach the images uploaded as evidence, and a picture of the bay the vehicle was parked in on the day (with street location), along with the PCN.

Let me know if there is a case here, and if there is, how to proceed with the challenge to the council.



Image with Closest Bay Sign


Google Street Location: https://maps.app.goo.gl/xSCA7HNc3qjk6k29A

Relevant evidence from CEO




PCN Images

« Last Edit: November 10, 2024, 05:45:33 pm by t_ree »

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


Sign by your car seems clear - I expect they've forgotten to replace it. Should be an easy win.
Like Like x 1 View List

Please post a GSV link to the exact location of parking.

Please post a GSV link to the exact location of parking.

Here it is here, as close as I could get it:

https://maps.app.goo.gl/xSCA7HNc3qjk6k29A

I'll probably look to draft the message for the challenge in the next few days. Ideally I don't really want to go back and forth with the council longer than needed, hopefully they get the message quickly.

That bay next to you was a disabled bay separated by hatching as you can see. The parking sign used to be a disabled sign just for that bay. At some point they changed it to a general bay but with Mon-Fri times which is probably a mistake. I think you're entitled to rely on it for the bays nearby despite the remaining markings.
Like Like x 1 View List

With two signs at the bay and no delineater between the restrictions for one or the other, the OP is entitled to take the sign nearest to where he parked. The council appear to have totally cocked-up the signs. The yellow hatching is not a bay delineator, it is there to give exit room for a disabled person.
Like Like x 1 View List


This is the space they gave in the challenge form. They have a chatbot preceding that offers to write and send your challenge reasons in one swoop. Seems a bit suspect so I thought I'd have a go manually first.

Please see the draft below. Let me know if I'm missing any key information or if I should expand on anything.



Re: PCN - PN21109265

To whom it may concern,

I am writing to challenge the PCN issued to my vehicle, registration number LD11OPZ, on Saturday, 9th November 2024 at 12:55 PM.

I dispute the claim that my vehicle was parked without payment in a Pay and Display bay. The signage at the location clearly indicates that the parking restrictions apply from Monday to Friday, 9 AM to 5 PM. Specifically, the sign closest to the parking bay where my vehicle was parked, and which would be most visible to the driver in this bay, specifies these restrictions.

The PCN evidence provided by the Civil Enforcement Officer appears to misrepresent the signage. The sign cited as evidence for the contravention is located several bays away from the parking bay in question. Furthermore, the photograph included in the evidence seems to suggest that the sign was directly in front of my vehicle, which is not accurate.

I believe the signage at this location is clear and unambiguous. Any person would have reasonably relied on the sign closest to the parking bay, which indicates no payment is needed on Saturdays. The yellow delineators for the bay don't indicate to me a change in the restrictions across the spaces, it only indicates extra space for a disabled user to leave their vehicle.

I kindly request that your team review this matter, and considering the signage in that immediate parking. Also I would request if you could kindly cancel this PCN.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.


This is the space they gave in the challenge form. They have a chatbot preceding that offers to write and send your challenge reasons in one swoop. Seems a bit suspect so I thought I'd have a go manually first.


Just went through the chatbot to see what it'd do when I gave the reasons, they emailed me a template as below:



Dear Newham Council Appeals

Penalty Charge Notice number: PN21109265

I wish to appeal against my Penalty Charge Notice (PCN).

I had a chat with your parking chatbot about the signs/road markings.

**EXPLAIN WHY YOUR PENALTY CHARGE NOTICE IS UNFAIR, FOR EXAMPLE IF YOU THINK A SIGN OR ROAD MARKING WAS FAULTY**

As evidence, I attach **EXPLAIN WHAT YOU’RE ATTACHING. EVIDENCE HELPS, FOR EXAMPLE A PHOTO OF A FAULTY SIGN OR ROAD MARKING**

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely




Don't think I need to change my draft much tbh. In terms of evidence, what would be best to supply them? The picture from my first post with the sign in question has to be one. Is it worth showing the "Mon-Sat" sign and how far away it is from the bay the vehicle was parked in.

Hi all,

Just to give an update, the council have finally sent a response email to my reps, and have confirmed that the PCN has been cancelled.

This must have been a confusing case for them as they have not provided the findings or any reasoning for why it's been cancelled. A relief nonetheless.

I'll attach a copy of the response from the council if anyone is interested.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]