Free Traffic Legal Advice

No need to complicate this. Single yellows in a CPZ are controlled by zone entry signs, unless they have their own timeplate.

Here there is one very near the line that is more than enough to mislead.

One case from a few years ago but I expect it's pretty much the same.

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

Case reference   2160040109
Appellant   xxxxxx
Authority   London Borough of Newham
VRM   EY64MVS
   
PCN Details
PCN   PN12696465
Contravention date   24 Sep 2015
Contravention time   20:44:00
Contravention location   Tennyson Road
Penalty amount   GBP 130.00
Contravention   Parked in a restricted street
   
Referral date   -
   
Decision Date   01 Mar 2016
Adjudicator   Gerald Styles
Appeal decision   Appeal allowed
Direction   cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and the Notice to Owner.
Reasons   I heard from the appellant when he attended on 1 March.
Although there are special arrangements in relation to the event days in the locality the appellant was entitled when parking to rely on the yellow plate posted probably some 5 yards away from where his car was at the time of ticketing on single yellow line.
I have looked closely at Google Streetview with him and studied his photographs and his case is a strong one. I have thought perhaps that the patrolling officer inadvertently missed seeing the sign which encouraged the appellant to park where recorded.
I have allowed the appeal on the basis that the appellant quite reasonably concluded that the yellow line where he was parked was governed by the nearby yellow plate which simply stated 7am-7pm. When ticketed it was after 7pm and although it was a match day the yellow signage as photographed by the appellant did notify parking was permissible when the appellant parked outside the white door of 2B.
It has always been the case that in regulated zones nearby yellow plates override the zone hours. These yellow plates may indicate greater or lesser restrictions than that the zone ones, effectively they take precedence.
For these reasons the Council evidence has not persuaded me any contravention occurred.
I have thus recorded the appeal as allowed.

YOu don't seem to have posted their rejection of your informal challenge, so please do so, so we can work out what you need to say in your formal reps against the NtO.

Please repost so that all sides of the entire document can be seen redacting only yr name and address.

https://imgpile.com/p/oiRPJyu

You are still only showing cut-down versions of the rejection. For example, on the 1st page the name of the suithority, the name of the governing Act, and of the utmost importance, the date of the letter, are all missing. (The whole enforcement process is governed by dates and ensuing deadlines.)

Quite often on here cases are successfully appealed because of errors in the 'small print'.

Dear Newham,

I apologise if my initial challenge wasn't sufficiently clear but the contravention did not occur as I was entitled to rely on the timeplate for the single yellow line that is on a post near to the line.

The timeplate restricts the yellow line to 7am-7pm Monday to Saturday - as this was a Sunday, the contravention could not have occurred.

I attach a picture of the timeplate.

I also refer you to London Tribunals case 2160040109, in which the adjudicator noted similarly that "the appellant quite reasonably concluded that the yellow line where he was parked was governed by the nearby yellow plate".

I look forward to your early confirmation of cancellation.