Free Traffic Legal Advice

Please post a GSV link to the exact location where you parked. I had a quick 'tootle' along Great Eastern Road on GSV, but  couldn't see any parking location at all, but GSV last view was 2015

Thanks for reply
GSV is added

OK. So if you look at this GSV view, you'll see there is a marked bay. The parking sign applies to that. So where were you parked, in or out of the bay ?
https://maps.app.goo.gl/TQzXMcFJrgEd9qrR6

I have to say that I have my doubts as to the bay being alongside double-yellow lines; most peculiar. No doubt others will comment, but the parking sign misleads the motorist, who, seeing a long lay-by park anywhere along it. The bay markings look very worn too. Typical council coock-up in my view.

OP, are you the registered keeper and are your DVLA V5C details current?

Some issues if this is taken forward:
The PCN alleges that the car at the location given in the PCN contravened a restriction on waiting.
The location on the PCN includes a reference to 'os lp38' which is either a major keying error on the CEO's part(but one which should not have been repeated in their notes) or is deliberately intended to mislead the driver and the authority because it bears no resemblance to the CEO's photo. The lp(lamppost) which is clearly visible in the photo taken from the rear of your car which shows lp36 within 3-4 metres on which there is a traffic sign which states:
***********

If, as the photo shows, the car was within the scope of the traffic sign on lp36 then the contravention did not occur because this sign does not create a waiting restriction.

It is irrelevant whether at some point between the two lps the restriction changed, the PCN should reflect what is objectively the case.

It therefore follows that the burden falls to the authority to establish that the restriction shown on the clear traffic sign did not apply to the car's location which would require evidence as to the spatial limits of the traffic sign AKA clear and regulatory-compliant road markings.

Both evidential photos show faded white line parallel to the carriageway which extend beyond the car and which could be considered to be those required to mark a parking place. However, as can be seen there are no termination markings which would prove that the car was outside this parking place.

It therefore follows that the driver was entitled to rely upon these markings and the traffic sign and that the contravention did not occur.

Tne authority would be well advised not to advance the argument that the white lines do not apply but that the DYL do because were they to do this then they would have to explain to an adjudicator what the hell was meant by:
A traffic sign regarding parking placed within the scope of DYL;
What is the meaning of the parking place markings?