Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hi everyone,

I received a PCN for parking in a residents-only area (left on the windscreen), and it was an honest mistake. The opposite side and the road leading up to it were for permit holders or pay-at-machine parking. My partner and I were running late, and our baby was hysterically crying—honestly, we were completely distracted and blanked on checking the signs.

We know there's no real excuse, but we’re in a tough spot and would appreciate any advice on how to handle this. To make matters worse, it's the third PCN we’ve received in a week (different timelines, all arriving together), and I’m really at my wits' end. Maternity pay is tight, and it’s been a lot to deal with.

Many thanks




https://maps.app.goo.gl/K2vBum4WwRjReKA96

Unfortunately we didn't. We saw no marked bay, didn't see the signs and thought as it was Sunday, it was free parking. I know.  Palm face. It's Greenwich how we thought that, it was confusion.

Well see what others think but they have technically given a wrong contravention. Problem is the lease car as Greenwich will probably reject the informal challenge and then the NTO is sent to the lease co.

+1
The problem is it being a lease car. You need to check with them what they do with PCNs and NtOs that arrive for people leasing their cars. Far too many just cough-up and on-charge the lessee, (adding 20% "admin fee" on the way, of course !)

Thanks all for your responses.  I've never had a pcn on the car like this. However, if it was a pcn sent to them, they usually contact me via email to say they have given my details and I should await correspondence from the issuing authority. They have never laid a pcn on my behalf.

How would I word a challenge based on the technicality of a wrong pcn issue?

Also, we've just realised there are either no markings on the floor or they are so faded they don't appear to be there. we have viewed the images of the vehicle from all angles and cannot see white lines marking the bay. This is another valid ground for appeal, no?