Here you go:
Dear Transport for London,
I challenge liability on the ground that the alleged contravention did not occur. The section of road where my vehicle is seen to be stopped in the CCTV footage is not marked in accordance with any road markings at all, as the video clearly illustrates. I have since returned to the location and have noted that new bay markings have been added, but these were not present at the time of the alleged contravention.
While I appreciate lines do not need to be maintained in pristine condition and substantial compliance is sufficient, in this case the bay markings were wholly absent and they cannot therefore have been substantially complaint. It follows that there was nothing to put me on notice that stopping at this location was restricted.
Furthermore service of a postal penalty charge notice is a procedural impropriety. Regulation 11 of The Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Approved Devices, Charging Guidelines and General Provisions) (England) Regulations 2022 provides that a postal penalty charge notice may be served if a road is marked in accordance with diagrams 1018.2 or 1017.1, and the High Court confirmed in Transport for London, R (on the application of) v London Tribunals (Environment and Traffic Adjudicators) [2023] EWHC 2889 (Admin) that this extends to bay markings.
However a road that is not marked with any visible markings at all cannot be marked "in accordance" with anything, rather it is unmarked.
In the circumstances service of a postal penalty charge notice is a procedural impropriety.
Yours faithfully,
Send this online and keep a screenshot of the confirmation page.
