Free Traffic Legal Advice

Can you check? GSV doesn't help.

Can you just tell the story of exactly what you did.

The traffic sign which is in your pic is situated o/s 66/68 which is where GSV puts this traffic sign.

If you live 2 hours away then clearly you took this photo at the time you found the PCN. In fact you took at least 2, one(out of focus- at least on my ipad) showing either 70030 or 36 or 38 you put in post 1. One showing clearly 70038 you posted later. You weren't to know what photos the CEO took, so you took some of your own. Fine.

Pity you didn't post the clear one first, we would have got to the nub quicker!

Anyway, that's history.

Your photo of the even side of Byron shows 70038.
The CEO's photo of your (the odd-numbered)side shows 70030.

A simple, narrow residential road within which there are at least 2 different paybyphone location numbers for locations opposite each other.

Is the above summary correct?

If so it's bonkers.

Grounds: 'Penalty exceeded....circumstances of the case'
You parked; you looked at the clear paybyphone location given opposite and paid using this information. It never crossed your mind and you still find incomprehensible that the council has allocated a different location number to your side than opposite(70030 and 70038 respectively). Even more surprising is that the council isn't simply using these for perhaps administrative and analytical purposes e.g. parking patterns etc. but actually as the basis for enforcing penalties.

You paid the correct tariff demanded by both 70030 or 70038, it is therefore totally unreasonable for the authority to pursue a penalty based simply on the use of a different location number which has been allocated, apparently irrationally and certainly not uniquely, to only one side of Byron Ave. and at least part of Gladstone Road(see the location on the enclosed receipt).

The authority's position might have merit if the tariffs were different or other conditions e.g. varied parking periods, no return times etc. applied. But none of these does apply: this is simply a motorist making a reasonable assumption being caught by the apparent irrational allocation of numbers.

Others will have views.

This is getting out of hand.

Crysta - do you have or remember what you said in your initial challenge?

Newham hasn't said anything about location codes in its rejection. As I said they concede payment was made.

I'm not sure anything more than reps saying I see you acknowledge payment for parking but have rejected my challenge. I am asking for cancellation on the grounds that you have clearly accepted parking was paid for at the time of the contravention.

Hello All,

Thanks for the reply. I didn't do anything special. Just used the template provided by council as following.

Dear Newham Council Appeals

Penalty Charge Notice number: PN3942539A

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

I paid to park using my mobile phone but was given a Penalty Charge Notice, so I would be grateful if you would reconsider my case.

I confirm that:

–  As evidence, I attach a screenshot or a receipt of my parking session.
–  I paid enough to cover my stay in the location I was in.
I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely

Yes, Absolutely correct summary @Andersen.

Thank you all for the input. @Stamfordman, @Andersen, @RichardW

Shall I put below in my representation? Is there any template I can use? I searched the spreadsheet but could't find the suitable.

Representation ground:
The alleged contravention did not occur.

VRN: EA15 FCF
PCN: PN3942539A

Reason: I could not understand why I was issued PCN even though I have paid for the parking as seen in attached receipt from 12.55 to 14.55. My appeal was rejected by the case worker stating "your vehicle was observed at 13.25. I have noted your comments however after reviewing the evidence provided I can confirm the payment expired at 14.55". Case worker acknowledged payment for parking but have rejected my challenge. I am asking for cancellation on the grounds that you have clearly accepted parking was paid for at the time of the contravention.

Upon detailed analysis of the PCN and payment, I realised that it possibly would have occurred that instead of 70300, I would have keyed in 70308 as the numbers sit on top of each other on keyboard. I paid in good faith that I am paying for the parking. As a good citizen, I had no intention of not paying for the parking. Both payments goes to the council so they are not at loss. I can only apologise for the possible error.

Is this enough or should I add/delete? 
I thought of revisiting the area in the weekend but didn't dare thinking I will get another PCN for bus lane or whatever.

We seem to have lost the thread a bit here...  to me it is clear that there IS an error in the Council's signage, with the sign outside no 66  (opposite where you parked) showing 70038,

Really? Do you mean the OP's pic? It isn't good enough.