Agreed.
But setting aside the OP's admissions - here at least- there doesn't seem to be evidence of the OP passing into the zone at the time alleged. I take the view that as appeals are against the rejection of reps, then all evidence must be in play at the reps stage and that to introduce key evidence of the facts(as opposed to the legal framework e.g. TMO etc.) after the reps procedure has been completed should not be permitted.
I'm also intrigued by the concept of a double-sided sign!