Hi, it has been many years since I received "gift" from the TFL CCTV camera. I wrote a letter to appeal the Contravention 50R - No Right Turn.
Please could you review and advise if I have my facts in order and if I haven't missed any grounds for the appeal? Kindly note that I removed the reg plate nb from the pictures myself, the TFL pictures show it clearly on 1 of 3 photos which they provided.
I am writing to formally challenge the above-mentioned PCN on the following grounds:
1. Inadequate Evidence Provided
The evidence accompanying the PCN consists of only three still images, and no video footage has been provided.
Under paragraph 1(1)(h) of Schedule 1 to the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) General Regulations 2007, a CCTV-enforced PCN must be accompanied by adequate evidence CLEARLY showing the contravention.
Therefore, the “No right turn” must be
1. Clearly visible AT THE JUNCTION
2. Conforming to the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 (TSRGD)
3. Not OBSTRUCTED, damaged, faded, or placed too high or low
None of the still images show a clearly visible and lawful "No Right Turn" sign being passed or ignored by the vehicle. The absence of any signage in the photographic evidence makes it impossible to establish that a contravention occurred. Without such evidence, the PCN is unenforceable.
2. Inadequate or Non-Compliant Signage at the Junction
The alleged contravention occurred at the junction of Hanger Lane (A406) and Audley Road, W5. There are no clearly visible “No Right Turn” signs at the junction itself. Any signage that may exist appears to be:
• Obstructed by large vehicles (buses, lorries, vans)
• Partially or completely obscured by foliage
• Not located at the decision point for a turning driver, i.e., not at eye level or at the junction mouth
According to Regulation 18 of the Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996, and the Traffic Signs
Manual Chapter 3, all signs must be clearly visible, correctly positioned, and well maintained.
I am attaching as an example a correctly placed signs in on another two roads. One of the pictures shows another street joining Hanger Lane but in this instance, the signs are visible. Another picture shows a road in vicinity which also contains informative signs as per regulation. Sadly, Audley Rd W5 doesn’t contain such signs.
Moreover, the signage must conform to the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 (TSRGD), including proper positioning and size relative to the road and visibility to the driver. No such compliance is evident in the case of Audley Rd, W5.
3. Camera Perspective is Misleading and Unfair
The images appear to have been taken from a CCTV unit mounted several metres above the road (approximately 4–5 metres high), offering a vantage point not available to drivers in normal passenger vehicles (with an eye level of approx. 1.0–1.2 metres).
Enforcement from an elevated position may misrepresent what a driver could reasonably have seen or reacted to, particularly when large vehicles are obstructing the view.
Furthermore, you may easily see on your records that on 26/06/2025 at 17h19 there was a stagnant traffic, and there were multiple buses, lorries and vans obstructing the view for normal car drivers who have eve level at 1m to a maximum 1.2 meters. To put it in a perspective – this is as high as an average table-top.
4. Road Markings and Junction Layout Are Misleading
The presence of a broken white centre line at the junction gives the impression that a right turn is permitted. In the absence of visible, clear, and legally compliant signage at the point of decision, this may mislead drivers into believing the turn is lawful.
This ambiguity undermines the enforceability of the restriction.
5. Mitigating Circumstances – Financial Hardship (separate from procedural challenge)
Since 26 April 2025, I have been unemployed and have had no income until 7 June 2025, when I was awarded statutory benefits. I had no income in May and had to expunge my savings to pay rent, utilities, taxes and food. The benefit awarded is insufficient to cover essential living expenses beyond rent and utilities, in fact it covers only gas and all other utilities and bills remain unpaid.
Please see the attached letter from the Department for Work and Pensions confirming this.
Note: While I understand financial hardship does not itself invalidate the PCN, I request that the authority consider exercising discretion on compassionate grounds in accordance with its enforcement policy.
Request
In light of the above, I respectfully request that the PCN be cancelled on the following grounds:
• The absence of clear, visible, and lawful signage at the point of decision
• Failure of the PCN evidence to demonstrate a contravention
• Procedural impropriety and/or non-compliance with regulatory requirements
• Significant mitigating financial hardship
Please confirm cancellation of the PCN or provide full details of the authority’s evidence and assessment.
LINKS TO THE CONTRAVENTION NOTICEhttps://drive.google.com/file/d/19jRji6xz9g5cg7xdOtwD9pdDbZRq6Q04/view?usp=sharinghttps://drive.google.com/file/d/1iHMtk4F_KOaEJrpMLPsBQ1f5XeGMk_Jh/view?usp=sharinghttps://drive.google.com/file/d/11pgL4NECjZ8iCBDYrD2x07RYx-YkJHiy/view?usp=sharinghttps://drive.google.com/file/d/1flu-hag6VYiGzWZgXIacL8WtDFpAlQm3/view?usp=sharinghttps://drive.google.com/file/d/1nLptF0l2uXkJljXBCgLEOcH4gnr2Xm4m/view?usp=sharinghttps://drive.google.com/file/d/17lYwkzkvjY417LrwJprM3bvLuQKYFEFX/view?usp=sharingLINK TO GOOGLE MAP STREET VIEWhttps://maps.app.goo.gl/VtYm3qfrNBhfBVbf9PICTURES FROM THE TFL:
[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
