Free Traffic Legal Advice

Sorry, but we need to see the location in GSV, and the video to give advice.

A recent adjudication at London Tribunals for a London Red-Route case was won because a Red Route must be signed as well as having the road markings, for CCTV to be used to enforce. If this is not the case, the contravention can only be enforced by a CEO at the roadside : -

https://www.ftla.uk/the-flame-pit/2260147562-definition-of-a-red-route-that-allows-postal-pcns-to-be-served/

No Problemo,

Here is the map location:

location of contravention

It's a long red route!

Thanks for posting the video Stamfordman. I just downloaded it myself from Sandwell and was in the process of uploading a link to this thread.

Its impossible from that clip to see if the car is truly stationary. To my eyes it looks like I'm edging the vehicle forward as the camera car gets close and passes my vehicle.

I've just read up on the restrictions attached to red routes and since my car is always stationary at some point as I manoeuvre onto the carriageway it looks like I'll be contravening them every time i leave my house!

Somewhat similar to this case in Reading:  https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/stopped-where-prohibited-on-a-red-route-or-clearway-reading-borough-council/

Council were obdurate ( ) and had to go to tribunal.

Any sensible person would say that with residency proof, and maybe proof that you were going out at the relevant time (e.g. Google time line if you have an Android phone), the council would cancel it.  But....

I think you'll get this cancelled but you can see why they issued it - the orientation of your car parallel to the road looks like it's parked. They wouldn't issue if it looked like you were waiting to pull out on the crossover, as I expect you were a few seconds later.

Draft reps and post here first.

I would also suggest enclosing proof of residence.

I completely agree with your point, but I was still a bit disappointed when the Sandwell officer didn't seem to respond to my claim that the car position is also wholly consistent with the manoeuvre I was actually executing. Particularly considering the flimsy nature of the video evidence.

Thanks for the suggestion to include proof of residence.

Do you think the appeal should be on the grounds of

1. "the alleged contravention did no occur",
2. "mitigating circumstances"

or

3. "other grounds"?

I've pasted my appeal wording below. It's basically a tightened up version of the account at the top of this thread with some added reference to the video evidence. Any suggested edits are welcome.

APPEAL WORDING

My car was recorded by CCTV outside my home for all of six seconds during which I was engaged in a manoeuvre reversing out of the garage at my home and waiting for a gap in the traffic to start my journey.

An image taken from a video frame on the PCN notice which is confirmed by the CCTV video footage shows that the way was not clear for me to join the traffic during the six second clip recorded.

The CCTV camera which recorded the alleged contravention seems to be mounted in a vehicle positioned on the carriageway in such a way that it was also directly responsible in preventing me from joining the traffic flow at the time of the video recording.

During the entire time of the video recording I was behind the wheel of the car with the engine running awaiting a gap in the traffic. My brother is shown closing a nearside door after depositing some luggage on the back seat.

I have scrutinized the CCTV footage and to my eyes it appears that from frame 1187 to frame 1199 (which is less than one second in time) I start slowly edging the car forward so as to begin positioning my vehicle to enter the flow of traffic.

The section of the road where i live is notorious for many accidents. I have observed many serious collisions from my window and in December 2023 on the opposite (northbound) carriageway running past my home I was hit by another driver in a no fault collision and my car was written off. It is for this reason I choose to take extra safety precautions by not reversing off my property directly onto the carriageway, but rather reverse partially onto the verge adjacent to the red route in order to join the traffic in a safer fashion.

In closing could I ask the Sandwell parking appeal adjudicator exactly how I am meant to exit my property in my vehicle without my car being briefly stationary, either adjacent to, or actually on the red route at some point during such a manoeuvre?

APPEAL WORDING or reps to the council?

Are you asking for comment on these?

Just to emphasise the London Tribunals case decided on 30th July 2026, here is the judgment: -

A contravention can occur if a vehicle is stopped where prohibited on a red route.


The Penalty Charge Notice was issued under Regulation 11(1)(d) of the Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Approved Devices, Charging Guidelines and General Provisions) (England) Regulations 2022 (the ‘2022 General Regulations’) on the basis of a record produced by an approved device.


There appears to be no dispute that the vehicle was stationary at this location, as shown in the closed-circuit television (cctv) images produced by the Enforcement Authority.


The Enforcement Authority’s case is that no stopping is permitted on the red route at any time on any day, as indicated by the double red line.


However, in R(TfL) v. London Tribunals (Environment and Traffic Adjudicators) & Ors [2023] EWHC 2889 (Admin), Mr Justice Swift decided at paragraph 16 that:


the requirements in sub-paragraphs (a) and (b) of the definition are cumulative; to be a red route for this purpose the road must be marked "in accordance with" both requirements. The requirements are not alternatives.


At paragraph 17, Mr Justice Swift concluded that:


Nor is it correct that the requirement at sub-paragraph (b) for signage can be construed as applying to one but not the other of the two alternative requirements within sub paragraph (a).... the correct conclusion is that the definition of red route requires that both condition (a) and condition (b) are met.


The Enforcement Authority does not appear to dispute that there is no signage at the location as it submits in its case summary that it is not required.


A sign is not required to put motorists on notice of the red route restrictions. However, the relevant issue in this present matter is whether the Enforcement Authority was entitled to issue a Penalty Charge Notice by post. The decision of the High Court in the case referred to above means that both lines and a sign are required to meet the statutory definition of a red route to enable the Enforcement Authority to issue a Penalty Charge Notice by post.


I therefore find that, because there was no sign, the red route was not a "red route" in accordance with the definition of Regulation 11(2) of the 2022 General Regulations and therefore that the Authority was not entitled to issue the Penalty Charge Notice by post.


Accordingly, this appeal must be allowed.

I have emphasise the basic point of the ruling in bold.