Good afternoon All
I received this PCN via notice to owner dated 26/7/23. I have already posted on Pepipoo but have been advised to also post here due to issues with the old forum. I've already challenged it and received a notice of rejection from Tower Hamlets so will now likely proceed to the adjudicator.
Here's the Notice to owner (first page only, let me know if you need the rest):
And the video:
Here's my challenge:
Dear Sir or Madam,
On the day of the alleged contravention, I had a work appointment near to the location. I am unfamiliar with the area. On approaching the junction there are no advance warning signs, which I believe would greatly help to warn motorists of the restriction on Fern Street, as it would give them enough time to make a decision. The signs near the entrance to Fern Street are angled in opposite directions to each other, facing traffic as it approaches. Unfortunately this meant I could only see one sign directly facing me as I approached the junction and I was unsure whether the restriction applied to the road ahead or to the left. There is very little time to make a decision there as no advance warning is given, and unfortunately I made the wrong decision and turned into Fern Street. I immediately realised that I might be turning towards the restricted area, as I could see people walking in the street further down, so I stopped as quickly as I safely could and immediately turned around and exited the road. The video evidence on your website shows me stop at or very close to the entrance to the restriction and start my turn before I exited the street. Therefore, the offence did not occur under "de minimis" and I would respectfully request that the PCN be cancelled immediately please. I would like to add that I am generally supportive of schools streets giving children a safer and less polluted walking route to their school, and I am careful to look out for signage indicating these zones. In this case the signage and lack of advance warning has caused genuine confusion over where the restriction actually is, and as the video shows, any incursion into the zone if any did occur, was so minimal that it must be considered "de minimis" and therefore the offence did not occur. Thank you for your time considering this representation. I hope the PCN can be cancelled without the need for an adjudication.
Yours faithfully,
And the Notice of Rejection (all pages):
After I sent in my challenge, I happened to pass the location again and noticed that since the alleged contravention, the signs have been turned so that they are now angled more like 45 degrees rather than face on towards incoming traffic on the main road as you approach the junction with the restricted road. This is highly significant in my opinion as it is now clearer that the restriction applies to the side road and not the road ahead, and there is only one reason Tower Hamlets would change the angle of the signs, which is that they have had a significant number of complaints/ challenges and they agree that the previous positioning was not clear enough. Unfortunately I saw this just after I sent my challenge in, if I had been able to include it, I think it would have been much more likely to be successful. Below are before and after photos I took from the same spot (followed by zoomed in photos) for comparison.
Before:
After:
Before zoomed:
After zoomed:
All thoughts and suggestions welcome. I haven't drafted anything yet but am planning to basically submit what I did in my challenge plus the subsequent photographic evidence that the signage has been changed in exactly the way I pointed out wasn't clear enough. In addition, the photos attached to their notice of rejection appear to have been taken AFTER the signs were turned to their new position. The sign relevant to my case is their photo on the right, second page of the notice, and would not have been face-on from that angle before they were re-angled. This would surely be admission of incorrect evidence by Tower Hamlets and completely undermine their case?
After writing the above, I looked on Google Street view. Looking at the most recent images from just over a year ago, the signs then were parallel with the main road. Therefore it looks like Tower Hamlets may have changed the angle twice - firstly from parallel with the main road to perpendicular so that oncoming traffic could see them at all, and then to around 45 degrees so that it is somewhat clearer that the signs apply to the side road and are not facing drivers straight on and confusing them!). I think the photos on the notice of rejection are actually from before the signs were changed the first time!
Many thanks
