Free Traffic Legal Advice

OK last night I submitted a late appeal explaining the circumstances, they also wanted me to submit my whole representation with it. Will post up later tonight.

Getting error messages when uploading to this site, but here is the reps I submitted to London Tribunals last nighthttps ://1drv.ms/b/c/560cd59511b71091/EaUdrXpxhyhDsMHd6SIC1YYBQSxA4uwo9XprVR2ZZvdtYw for which I requested an in-person hearing. Would be grateful if someone can look through and and advise if I've covered everything?

That link doesn't work for me.

OK this works.
PCN & Tow appeal.

Back to your dashcam please. You've posted up a still image. Are you saying this is a frame from when the car was in motion and not yet parked? IE approaching the sign on the pole visible on the offside of the road?

I assume so, so it seems that the Council believe your frame is a still from when the car was stationary and parked in the bay. Not a frame from when it was approaching the parking place. Seems the Council believe you were parked on the double yellow lines on the nearside.

I think you need to make this clearer because at first reading I understood your photo to be of when the car was stationary and parked on the left side of the raod. Yes indeed the pole visible to the offide has no suspension sign however is not relevsnt if it it's on the opposite pavement to where you parked.

I'm concerned that an Adjudicator might also read your submission the same way and misunderstand the realtionship between where you actually parked and the signpost.

You case is that there was no suspension sign in-situ in the bay on the right hand side of the road, where is where you parked, at the time that you parked. The suspension notice was installed at some unknown time after you parked. So make that very clear. Your dashcam image was taken just before you reached the parking bay and confirms that the suspension notice was not in place. This is the same pole visible in the CEO's evidence photo that shows the same pole at the offside rear of your car after you'd parked.

Please revise your draft nd post it up.

Back to your dashcam please. You've posted up a still image. Are you saying this is a frame from when the car was in motion and not yet parked? IE approaching the sign on the pole visible on the offside of the road?

I assume so, so it seems that the Council believe your frame is a still from when the car was stationary and parked in the bay. Not a frame from when it was approaching the parking place. Seems the Council believe you were parked on the double yellow lines on the nearside.

I think you need to make this clearer because at first reading I understood your photo to be of when the car was stationary and parked on the left side of the raod. Yes indeed the pole visible to the offide has no suspension sign however is not relevsnt if it it's on the opposite pavement to where you parked.

I'm concerned that an Adjudicator might also read your submission the same way and misunderstand the realtionship between where you actually parked and the signpost.

You case is that there was no suspension sign in-situ in the bay on the right hand side of the road, where is where you parked, at the time that you parked. The suspension notice was installed at some unknown time after you parked. So make that very clear. Your dashcam image was taken just before you reached the parking bay and confirms that the suspension notice was not in place. This is the same pole visible in the CEO's evidence photo that shows the same pole at the offside rear of your car after you'd parked.

Please revise your draft nd post it up.

Thanks for your feedback. Yes the image is of my vehicle on approach to the bay, while in motion...let me know if this is better...


I parked my vehicle on Sunday, 21st July 2024 at approximately 20:50pm at Virginia Road, where I am a resident permit holder. My vehicle was removed on the 23rd of July 2024 at 10:57am for allegedly parking in an suspended bay. After paying the £265 fine to recover my vehicle I appealed the PCN and removal as instructed by the Enforcement Authority.

In my appeal submission to the EA, I provided images from my dashcam which shows my vehicle on approach to the parking bay. The image is a still image which capture's the signage at the last possible moment, as dashcams are forward facing, needed the image to be from an angle which shows the signage in its view. Please see images from dashcam attached as evidence. This sign post is the same  as this taken from a google maps location highlighting that this is the same bay where my vehicle was removed from and the last signage on the road where I parked. https://maps.app.goo.gl/t99GA6a5zUH8GuxT9
However, the EA in their response, state that the dashcam image is "only showing the street in front of the vehicle", they also state the CEO’s images indicate that the suspension notice is behind my vehicle, further highlighting the complete lack of knowledge or investigative skills to understand that a dashcam can not see out the side of a vehicle, and therefore this image would have been the last taken of the relevant bay and signpost.
The EA state in their notice of rejection that notices were put in place on 18th July, however, the date and timestamp of the image from my dashcam contradicts this. I can not be certain if this signpost was missed or if it had been vandalised after being placed.

The image I provided from my dashcam, plus the image from CEO is of the same parking signplate pole. However, the EA fail to acknowledge this and rely on this to reject my appeal. This can be verified by the google maps image given above and the painting on the wall behind the signage on all images.
Furthermore, there is a procedural impropriety on the part of the EA. The Trafic Management Act 2004 stipulates that a notice of rejection must be served within 56 days of the appeal, however the EA has not been able to provide any evidence that this was sent by post, or by email within the regulated timeframe.

outcome, case 2240431122

Mr Dishman attended today to represent the appellant who did not attend.

The Penalty Charge Notice was issued when the appellant’s car was parked in a suspended bay. At the time that the Penalty Charge Notice was issued, and the vehicle was subsequently removed there was a suspension sign on the post behind the appellant’s car. The sign was below the permanent sign for the bay. In addition to the permanent sign that is also a sign for a cycle route. The post on which the sign is placed is next to a wall on which there is a mural of an animal painted in red.

The council provides evidence that the sign and three others in Virginia Road were erected on 18th July and that at that time the appellant's car was not parked.

Mr Zaman provided one image from his dashcam and I have seen further images uploaded by Mr Dishman on 2nd December. The images provided are stills which show that the appellant drove along Virginia Road at 20:51 on 21st July. The last image is at 20:51:59 taken from a moving vehicle. It shows the post outside the wall with the mural. I find that it is quite clear that at that time there was no suspension sign on the post. Mr Zaman then pulled over to the right of the road and parked near to the junction. Once he had parked his car the sign next to the wall with the mural was behind the car.

I find that the suspension sign had been removed between 18th and 21st July when the appellant parked his car. I have seen no evidence of when it was re-erected. The sign was in place when the civil enforcement officer took photographs at 11:00 on 23rd July. The council has not provided any evidence to show when the sign was put up again notwithstanding that the appellant provided a photograph of the post outside the wall with the mural when he made his formal representation.

I allow this appeal. I am not satisfied that there was any notice of the suspension of the bay in which the appellant parked his car.

I had three major arguments but it was only necessary to discuss signage as the adjudicator had 10 minutes reading the file before I went into her room (I was early and seen early as the case prior to mine was a no show).

One pithy remark she did make, and others take note, that citing the council's 'complete lack of knowledge or investigative skills' when your own case is unclearly presented wasn't a good start. Politeness pays. However, the dashcam images and my explanation helped the adjudicator to understand exactly what had happened and she picked up that the council had been told the signage was missing and didn't comment upon it.

This was my only case yesterday, in contrast to the nine I did last week, and it turned out well. The PCN paid at £65 and the towing fee of £200 now both have to be refunded.