Free Traffic Legal Advice

You need to use another hosting site; the one you used no longer covers the UK

So how incorrect was the entered reg number ? You can argue on 'O' and '0' (zero), because the official font for number plates has no zero character, the letter O is used. If it was for a totally different registration, then it is mitigation, I'm afraid, despite full payment being made. London councils and TfL between them are collecting well over £600 million a year from PCN penalties. So they're not going to stop the money rolling in.

There may be an error in the PCN or on the Redbridge website relate to payments for PCNs, but we await your PCN post on a different hosting site. 'Hippocrates' is good on this aspect, so hopefully he will post soon.

Quote from: Incandescent on May 23, 2026, 09:26:39 pm

There may be an error in the PCN or on the Redbridge website relate to payments for PCNs, but we await your PCN post on a different hosting site. 'Hippocrates' is good on this aspect, so hopefully he will post soon.

Please check now, do the images appear properly ?

Yes.

Is any member able to help with this please ?

@Hippocrates
@stamfordman

I have drafted an appeal below.  Please review and provide feedback

Formal Representation Against PCN – Redbridge Council

Dear Sir/Madam,

I wish to make formal representations against the above Penalty Charge Notice.

The alleged contravention did not occur. The parking charge for the vehicle was in fact paid via the RingGo app for the relevant parking session and location. Unfortunately, an honest and inadvertent error was made when entering the vehicle registration number within the application, resulting in payment being linked to an incorrect registration.

Importantly, the council suffered no financial loss whatsoever, as the appropriate parking fee was paid in full for the relevant period. This was clearly a genuine keying error and not an attempt to avoid payment. In these circumstances, enforcing a penalty charge of £110 is wholly disproportionate and contrary to the principles of fairness and reasonable public administration.

I would respectfully ask the council to exercise discretion and cancel the PCN on this occasion.

Further, I note that the PCN appears to contain procedural defects and may not comply with the requirements of the applicable legislation.

The PCN states:

“The Penalty Charge of £110 must be paid no later than the last day of the period of 28 days beginning with the date on which the PCN was served.”

However, Schedule 2 paragraph 2(d) of The Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Approved Devices, Charging Guidelines and General Provisions) (England) Regulations 2022 requires a Regulation 9 PCN to state:

“that the penalty charge must be paid within the period of 28 days beginning with the date on which the alleged contravention occurred”.

The PCN therefore appears to rely on outdated wording derived from the superseded 2007 regulations by referring to the date the notice was “served” rather than the date the alleged contravention “occurred”.

In addition, the PCN does not appear to adequately convey the information required under Regulation 3 of The Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Representations and Appeals) (England) Regulations 2022, specifically regarding the recipient’s right to make representations before a Notice to Owner is served and the council’s duty to consider those representations.

Accordingly, I submit that the PCN is non-compliant and unenforceable.

Should the council nevertheless decide not to cancel the PCN, please treat this letter as a request for:

1. A full copy of the relevant Traffic Management Order relied upon;
2. Copies of all CEO notes and photographs;
3. Confirmation that the council has properly considered exercising discretion in light of the payment having been made.

I look forward to your confirmation that this PCN has been cancelled.

Yours faithfully,

Does this mean this is good to go  and submit the challenge ?