Free Traffic Legal Advice

Motorists aren't allowed to park anywhere there whether within marked bays or not. TfL are idiots.

You cannot have double red lines and footway parking because the effect of the DRL is NO stopping, let alone parking/waiting, at any point between the centre-line of the carriageway and the back of the footway.

I cannot make out what point you're making. I can see that they have tried to leave single vehicle width gaps to allow cars to cross the footway, did you park wholly or in part on one of these?

Leaving aside the legality of allowing off-carriageway parking there the absence of clear bay markings along the road there and position of sign should win this for you IMO. If you step back in time you can see various markings but it's what's there now that counts IMO.

Leaving aside the legality of allowing off-carriageway parking there the absence of clear bay markings along the road there and position of sign should win this for you IMO. If you step back in time you can see various markings but it's what's there now that counts IMO.

Exactly my reasoning. I've done the initial challenge with TfL now, let's see what they come back with.

In the submission to TfL I said the following:

I believe parking is permitted at this location based on the signage available. The sign seemed to indicate that there were marked bays to the left, although the markings for all of the bays seemed to have all but faded away. Thus I, like any other motorist, was left to deduce the locations of the bays using common sense and what was left of the markings. Given the very faded marking at the front of my car, and the sign some distance from the rear of my car, I made the very reasonable assumption that I was parking in one of the bays referred to by the sign.

Thanks, have done that while we wait!

I received a joke of a response to my informal representation, below, followed by my notice to owner a bit after. Any advice on anything in particular to include in formal representations?

Thank you for your informal representation regarding the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN).
Transport for London (TfL) acknowledge the comments raised within your representation stating that as seen in the image
provided, the vehicle was parked in a marked parking bay, similar to the other vehicles parked along this stretch. Although,
the painted lines are very faded. Furthermore given this, you believe there was no contravention.
We issued the PCN because your vehicle was observed parked with one or more wheels on or over a footpath or any part
of a road other than a carriageway on the date and time of contravention at the above location. The Highway Code item 244
states that a vehicle "MUST NOT park partially or wholly on the pavement in London, and should not do so elsewhere
unless signs permit it. Parking on the pavement can obstruct and seriously inconvenience pedestrians, people in
wheelchairs or with visual impairments and people with prams or pushchairs". Parking on the pavement or verge is
therefore potentially dangerous to pedestrians, and could potentially cause damage to pipes and cables housed under the
paving stones. In the few locations where parking on the pavement is allowed, it is clearly indicated by signs and road
markings. There is no signage or road marking in place at the above location indicating that parking in this manner is
permitted.
It is the legal responsibility of every road user and business operator to identify all the traffic laws that must be complied
with, and to then comply. The relief of congestion and the improvement of traffic flows are of strategic importance to
London. The red routes are by definition roads that are particularly sensitive to the disruptive effect of illegal stopping. As
the Highway Authority with the responsibility for the performance of the red route network, TfL places a very high priority on
achieving full compliance with the restrictions and expects every road user to plan and operate their road use fully within the
law at all times.
The Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) in this case is considered by Transport for London (TfL) as a credible witness. The
Officer is employed by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) as a CEO and was acting on behalf of TfL in enforcing the red
route regulations.
We have considered your informal representation. However we do not consider you have established grounds or suitable
reasons for the Penalty Charge to be cancelled.

Thanks. Notice to owner is here - https://imgur.com/a/ej9rowr

PCN - 26th March
Informal rep - 2nd April
Response from tfl - 7th April
NtO - 29th April