Free Traffic Legal Advice

It will tell you on the form how to view the evidence / challenge the PCN.  Video shows the car turning round and then driving back through the restriction.

Street view shows a sign that says 170 yds, which seems about right, and the signs are clearly visible at the restriction, so I doubt there is any hope on the contravention.  Post the back of the PCN, there might be a technical appeal.  An appeal on the basis of you complied with the spirit of the restriction might work, but most councils are cash strapped and hard nosed these days!

Hello
Is there any further help on this one, for me, please?

Thank you for your reply and links Hippocrates.

When I make my appeal,  I simply use use your challenge statement and to include the Legislation link, as well?
I need not add anything else other than the references on the PCN?
Sorry to ask this, I'm just not sure.

Hello all,
Following my request for help, I simply copied and pasted the link provided by Hippocrates.

                ......................................................

I make this collateral challenge against the validity of the PCN as it is missing mandatory information as provided at Para. 4 (8 ) (v) of


https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/2003/3/section/4/enacted

(v)that, if the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period, an increased

charge may be payable.

Clearly, this refers to Para. 4 (8 ) (iii):

(iii)that the penalty charge must be paid before the end of the period of 28 days beginning

with the date of the notice;

Therefore, it follows that the statement: "If you fail to pay the Penalty Charge or make representations before the end of a period of 28 days beginning with the date of service of this notice an increased charge of £240 may be payable” adds to the lack of clarity by its omission. Even on its own, whether the required information was included or not, it is also arguable that it conflates the two periods using the word "or" which many would view as being conjunctive. Furthermore, even if the statement were to be interpreted disjunctively, there is still no clarity due to the missing information. So, it follows that it cannot possibly be interpreted disjunctively.

                      ..................................................

I have had a reply from Croydon Council.


'I note that your grounds for representations/objections are not stated. Until it is clear why you are making representations, I am unable to deal with this matter.
Please forward your grounds for representations in writing within the next 10 days so that the matter can be dealt with.'

I must have missed something here. How do I respond to this, please?

Many thanks.

Contravention did not occur.

Hello all
I've had a response from Croydon and they have rejected my reply.

I'm not sure what to do now, please advise on my next step.
Many thanks.


[/img]
[/img]

[/img]
[/img]
[/img]
[/img]

This was my first response (16/09/25)
Hello

I make this collateral challenge against the validity of the PCN as it is missing mandatory information as provided at Para. 4 (8 ) (v) of

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/2003/3/section/4/enacted

(v)that, if the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period, an increased charge may be payable.

Clearly, this refers to Para. 4 (8 ) (iii):

(iii)that the penalty charge must be paid before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of the notice;

Therefore, it follows that the statement: "If you fail to pay the Penalty Charge or make representations before the end of a period of 28 days beginning with the date of service of this notice an increased charge of £240 may be payable” adds to the lack of clarity by its omission. Even on its own, whether the required information was included or not, it is also arguable that it conflates the two periods using the word "or" which many would view as being conjunctive. Furthermore, even if the statement were to be interpreted disjunctively, there is still no clarity due to the missing information. So, it follows that it cannot possibly be interpreted disjunctively.

I look forward to your reply.

They sent a letter which is in this thread.
and this was my reply.(13/10/25)

Thank you for your correspondence letter dated 6th October 2025.

My grounds for representations/objections is:

CONTRAVENTION DID NOT OCCUR.

Many thanks

Total failure to consider. Do you have any screenshots of the payment/representations page?