A little help from Chat GPT with some amendments
I am writing to formally appeal the Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) on the grounds that the evidence provided does not conclusively prove that a contravention occurred.
Upon reviewing the evidence provided, I note the following inconsistencies and concerns that I believe justify the cancellation of this PCN:
1. Failure to Display a Registration Mark in the Video Evidence
The video footage clearly shows the vehicle in question making a contravention. However, the vehicle does not display a legible registration mark in the video. This raises serious doubts about the ability to definitively identify the vehicle, as the absence of a legible registration mark undermines the accuracy and reliability of the footage as evidence of my vehicle’s involvement in the contravention.
2. Separate Image Showing the Registration Mark but No Contravention
A separate still image provided shows my vehicle’s registration mark clearly visible. However, this image does not depict the contravention itself. Instead, it simply shows a highlighted registration plate, without any indication of the alleged violation. As such, this image cannot be used to substantiate the claim of a contravention.
3. Discrepancy in Vehicle Features Between the Video and Photo Evidence
The still image showing the registration mark also clearly shows two tail lights beside the number plate. However, the video footage does not show any tail lights beside the number plate. This significant discrepancy suggests that the video and the photo may not have been taken of the same vehicle or at the same time, further weakening the case for a contravention.
Given these discrepancies, I respectfully request that the penalty charge be reconsidered and the PCN be cancelled, as the evidence provided fails to conclusively demonstrate that a contravention occurred involving my vehicle.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your response.
