Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hello again,

At long last, I've received the NTO today, and will attach it here.

Coincidentally, I did drive up that road on my way home today, for the first time probably since the contravention, and I was surprised to see further down the hill, about 30 feet from the signs, the right hand sign is completely blocked from view by an evergreen tree. I did not see this when I sent the pics of the signs as I'd just walked down the hill to the signs. Does the fact that only one sign is visible in warning to approaching cars, until you are nearly upon the sign, warrant the notice being invalid? I'll post a pic of this view also.

I've redacted your postal address from the NTO above, as you don't really want that to be published on the internet.

In the first instance please draft a representation and put on here for review, and we'll tidy it up for you.

Apologies, my previous picture of the obscured sign is now visible, I often have trouble with this site. For instance, it will freeze up and become unable to scroll through, I'm using my phone perhaps it doesn't like that. Anyway, this is what I've written. I look forward to your thoughts, and am grateful once again:

"

To whom it may concern,

I write in reference of the PCN HR76270141, that was issued on 18/12/2024, and the subsequent NTO just received yesterday, on  20/02/25.

I wish to challenge this PCN, on the basis that the restricted area is poorly sign posted, with one of the two signs at either side of the road where the PPA ZONE begins being obscured by a type of conifer tree, and this sign is only visible when just about to pass where it is located. The road narrows dramatically at this point, so much so, that cars are directed to park on the pavement, and one must pay extra attention to navigate this part of the road. A sign that is obscured until the last moment, is easily missed, there being only one in view on the left hand side could easily be taken to refer to the road that turns left at that point.

I live on the road adjacent, at ** Stanmore Hill, and would have thought residents who live less than 100 m away from this new parking arrangement would have been notified of this drastic change to the neighbourhood. I have lived here since May 2021,  but have only occasionally driven up Green Lane, and usually only do so when there are roadworks in my road. I think I've parked in Green Lane on no more than 4 occasions in that time.

The night before the PCN was issued, I did park there as I had been suffering a bout of vomiting after drinking a smoothie with spirulina powder in it. Apparently, some people are violently allergic to spirulina, and I must be one of them, as I had a nasty bout of vomiting for several hours before returning home. I thought I was recovered, but, as I drove home, I could feel the nausea rising again, and so when I did see many free spaces to park, in Green Lane, some 50m before the place I normally park in Spring Lake, I took the earliest opportunity to be out of the car.

The normal arrangement for residents bays in this area, including down the hill much closer to Stanmore Broadway where all the shops are, is that the bays are only patrolled between 3 and 4 pm, Monday to Friday. Is this portion of Green Lane zoned any differently than the rest of the roads in the area? Again, why is this change not being broadcast?

I offer that it would be reasonable to make an assumption that all resident's bays in the area, operate under the same conditions, unless there has been notification to those that live nearby, to the contrary. I have never received any such notification of a change.

This being a new type of arrangement, not commonly seen, I would have thought it only just to ensure that all are aware there is a new type of parking enforcement, especially as it's one that is not concurrent with all those that surround it."

OP, I urge you to read your draft as if you were a critical reader looking for holes like, say, a council!

Your photo simply demonstrates how clearly the restriction is signed, not how badly. So what if two signs aren't clear when the one placed adjacent to your traffic lane is as clear as a bell?

Now, if you approached from the road on the left which we can see in the photo then IMO the position of both signs comes into play. But if you did then your photo is hardly germane because you were never at this point.

@HCAnderson, I'm not used to having to fight these things, never having got one before. Is it not a matter of procedure that if they are required to put up a pair of signs, that both of those must be visible? If not, why 2 then? When a single would suffice ...

I'm not at all sure what other reasons to fight the PCN I would have, but have carried on in this process, after being encouraged to do so on here.

The smoothie was made by my sister, and the vomiting that night was unexplained, it was only a few days later that I learnt about adverse reactions to spirulina.

Again, what evidence do you have to support this? As a last resort it may have to come down to a witness statement from your sister, but the reason I mention this is illustrated here, the most recent outcome based on this was Nashrin Master v London Borough of Hackney (2240537076, 19 February 2025). This gives you another angle of attack entirely separate from the signage issues, and having two grounds of appeal is much better than just having one.

The only evidence i'd have would be a witness statement from my sister, and as I haven't mentioned it during this process except on here, would that not be acceptable to mention it at this late stage now?

It's not that late, you're still at the representations stage. A witness statement must provide the full name and address of the witness, if you're happy putting something together then great, if not please PM me and I'll do my best to assist.

The main point of getting a statement (or any document for that matter) is illustrated by the case of Nashrin Master v London Borough of Hackney (2240537076, 19 February 2025).