Free Traffic Legal Advice

– Vehicle reg: LS63 UCP
– PCN number: WE64271869
– Alleged contravention time: 20:47
– Date of service: 20/11/2025
– Contravention: Code 45 “Stopped on a taxi rank”

I received a Penalty Charge Notice from the City of Westminster for Code 45 (Stopped on a taxi rank) on Long Acre at 20:47 on 20/11/2025. g whether the PCN is valid, whether the signage/markings comply, and whether there are any legal flaws. In my view, the signage appears inconsistent. The road markings on the asphalt state “Loading Only”, which suggests a loading bay until 18:30 mon-sat, yet the upright sign indicates that the area is restricted to taxis From 18:30-00:00 and then from 00:00 until it becomes a loading bay again at 8:30. Now that I look at the sign better it seems that one can park here only on Sunday. The Civil Enforcement Officer also did not take a photograph of the entire sign. I am struggling to understand how these two elements can be consistent with each other, and whether the restriction was properly conveyed at the time. I would appreciate your thoughts on this.

I have attached all pages of the PCN and images on the below link:

https://imgpile.com/p/6IyytDq

Google Street View link to the exact location:https://maps.app.goo.gl/N2AiQ6jrmDsxx1KT8

Thank you in advance, happy to provide any additional info needed.

Hi stamfordman,

Thanks, understood. roundel is indeed present: it’s the standard blue circle with the red X above the wording “No stopping”.

What I am trying to understand now is whether the dual-use arrangement is signed correctly, because the order from April 2024 says this location was converted into a dual-use goods vehicle loading bay / taxi rank:

Taxi rank (no stopping) from midnight–8:30am and 6:30pm–midnight (Mon–Sat)

Goods vehicle loading bay during 8:30am–6:30pm (Mon–Sat)

At the time of the alleged contravention (20:47), the taxi-rank restriction would be in force, so I understand that point.

However, on the ground the original “Loading Only” legend is still clearly visible beneath overpaint. Westminster’s notice suggests a formal conversion, but the surface markings on site still show the previous designation.

Could this discrepancy affect the adequacy of signage, given that drivers are expected to understand the restriction from both elements?

Would appreciate your view on whether this inconsistency could amount to a challenge.