Free Traffic Legal Advice

De minimis is the way to go as from what you say you know or saw the signs and checked your clock so the alternative challenge of not seeing signs wouldn't be true?

Just be aware that in this benighted country of ours, councils are now the new Robber Barons, and venal, rapacious, and mendacious with it. So don't be surprised if they reject your reps. They do this to all reps because the know that virtuallu all people then cough-up knowing little about the law, so assume the council does know, and they pay the discount to make it all go away.

Thanks for finding this case.

We have lots of cases to refer to. It's best to cite at the tribunal if necessary. The council knows full well it's trying it on.

This type of clock issue is adjudicator dependent but anything within a minute is usually a good case. Some can be very generous as below.

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


Case reference   2250224565
Appellant   xxxxx
Authority   London Borough of Lambeth
VRM   EK12FAO
   
PCN Details
PCN   LJ3241877A
Contravention date   17 Mar 2025
Contravention time   09:26:00
Contravention location   Elmcourt Road
Penalty amount   GBP 130.00
Contravention   Fail comply restriction vehicles entering ped zone
   
Referral date   -
   
Decision Date   02 Sep 2025
Adjudicator   Belinda Pearce
Appeal decision   Appeal allowed
Direction   cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and the Enforcement Notice.
Reasons   1. The Enforcement Authority assert that the said vehicle, being of a class prohibited, was driven at a location at a time when restricted for use by pedestrians and vehicles of an excepted class only.
2. The Appellant denies liability for the ensuing Penalty Charge Notice on the basis of the prevailing circumstances and challenge as stated in the written representations..
3. The Enforcement Authority who assert that the said vehicle was so driven contrary to an operative restriction is obliged to adduce evidence to the requisite standard to substantiate that assertion:-
The evidence upon which the Enforcement Authority rely comprises copy Penalty Charge Notice, governing Traffic Management Order provisions, together with contemporaneous photographic evidence: CCTV footage and still frames taken there-from images showing the said vehicle passing signage notifying motorists of the restriction.
The Enforcement Authority adduce further images of the signage at the location.
4. The evidence adduced by the Enforcement Authority was examined to evaluate the allegation in conjunction with the Appellant's representations.
The restriction at the location is intermittent; the morning period of operation is from 8.15 until 9.30 a.m.
The point of issue of the Penalty Charge Notice is 9.26 a.m.
The contemporaneous capture shows, by virtue of the clock counter integral to the camera, that the said vehicle passes the signage at 09:26:27.
The Appellant contends that such time may not have 'matched with her car's clock. '
5. Since the signage does not display an integral clock, motorists are obliged to accept the reliability of their own time-informing methods.
Unless signage is accompanied by a clock evidencing the time upon which the Enforcement Authority rely, variations will occur.
Indeed no evidence is adduced to establish the accuracy of the clock integral to the camera.
Evidentially I cannot be satisfied that the contravention occurred, accordingly I Allow this Appeal.

Looks OK, it makes the good point that if the council are going to Serve PCNs based on seconds within the controlled hours, then they should erect a clock by the sign.