Definitely appeal, if they'll take money out of you, then you might as well make them work for it.
I can understand that, if you'r not used to road restrictions, that situation could be confusing, as the private parking areas are all off that road, with the main road beeing the public road.
But an adjudicator won't, you are meant to know the difference, and you have a sign right behind the van and there's is no chance of getting that cancelled on that ground (If you could send the exact location, we can see where the UKPC sign is exactly compared to your van0.
I do see one possible angle here, others might confirm if that could work on your case or not, but if you get nothing else on time, use this :
I challenge this PCN on the ground of procedural impropriety :
- The allegation in the Penalty Charge Notice is the standardized and rather complex wording of a "12" allegation.
It consists of 43 words and encompasses the possibility of application to four different ways in which a contravention might occur.
The reason for this standardization relates to how the Mayor of London authorizes rates of penalty, however, this does not exempt the local authority from the legal necessity of giving to myself an adequate description of why the claim to penalty is being made.
This is to allow me to be able to make an informed decision as to whether to pay the discount rate or dispute the PCN.
The PCN did not, adequately explain the nature of the allegation, and this is a procedural impropriety.
- Further to that, as this contravention code (12) covers different types of bays, it is essential that the suffixes and the additional explanatory wording issued with the contravention codes (in this case Suffix R -Residents bay) are used as motorists are entitled to know in which type of bay they were in when the contravention occurred.
This is confirmed at paragraph 6 of the guidance issued in the FAQ on Differential Parking Penalties issued on 15 May 2007 to the various London local authorities.
No suffix can be seen on the copy Penalty Charge notice, and this is another procedural impropriety.
The council will reject this, as they always do, no matter what you write. The next step after the rejection, is to appeal to the London Tribunals, but if you loose you pay double the fine. So they gamble on the fact that you won't take the chance, and they will reject your representations either way.
In any case, again, doesn't cost nothing to appeal, and make them work for your money either way.
