Westminster parking ticket - 12 Parked in resident bay

So will they write to me now with their response?

I think Westminster's policy is to respond in writing, whether letter or email or both. And it is a policy matter.

And they must have a policy.

Ah ok so I guess it'll be in writing then. Thanks

Well, they responded by email anyway. Just received this stock response. So the fact that the sign was missing and the nearest sign being further away than the loading sign, do you think I still have a realistic chance to fight this? Cheers.

Thank you for your correspondence regarding the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN).
The PCN was issued because you parked in a residents' or shared use parking place or zone without a valid virtual permit
or clearly displaying a valid physical permit or voucher or pay and display ticket issued for that place where required, or
without payment of the parking charge.
Your challenge against this PCN has been rejected because you are not permitted to park in a resident bay without a
valid.
The signage was clear and should have been adhered to.
There is a high demand for resident parking space in the City of Westminster and to ensure that as much space as possible
is made available for the use of permit holders, any vehicle parked in a permit holder's bay that a CEO is unable to confirm
is covered by a valid permit on their handheld device, is a high priority for enforcement action. While this may sometimes
seem harsh, the City Council needs to take this course of action to keep resident bays clear for use by permit holders, who
pay an annual fee to park near their homes.
If you do not have a residents' permit, and you need to park during controlled hours, you may do so in Pay-to-Park bays.
These facilities are for general use and are intended to allow short term stays. If you need to park outside controlled hours,
you may do so free of charge on single yellow lines and in Pay-to-Park bays.
It remains the motorists' responsibility to ensure they have parked correctly and adhere to the restrictions in place or may
be liable to receive a PCN.
I am able to offer you a further 14 days, from the date of this letter, to pay the PCN at the discounted rate. You now have
two options.

(1, Pay it. 2, Formal representations)

This is the evidence I have. It shows that there had been a sign right next to where my car was parked, but it has been removed (why would they do that?). The sign I checked before parking was the loading bay sign directly behind me which became inactive 1hr before I arrived.  There does appear to be a line behind my car marking out a boundary though, I honestly didn't see that at the time.
The sign stating resident's only was a good 4-5 car lengths ahead. I don't think I even saw that at the time, but even if I had, surely it's unreasonable to expect me to park, then think to myself I better walk 10-15 metres in each direction just to check to see if there are any other signs and then try to figure out if I'm in the catchment of a sign 10-15 metres away, or the sign directly behind me.

https://imgpile.com/p/3O4BLEt#gallery-1

You are entitled to take the information on the bay sign nearest to your car, and not to have to traipse the street looking for a possible suspension. However, you must be careful, because where there are two adjacent bays with different restrictions like here, look for the bay separator lines. These are two parallel dashed lines at rightangles to the kerb, marking the boundary of the two bays.

Here is the boundary shown on GSV for where you parked: -
https://maps.app.goo.gl/D1R3wphEU5xSfjmeA

So which side of that boundary where you ?

Thank you. I was on the right hand side of it, exactly where that Mercedes is parked in the street view.

Honestly, that is my mistake not seeing those marker lines. I can see them in my video aswell. I just didn't think to even check, since there were no other signs anywhere near where I was parked.
However, since I was clearly the wrong side of that line, that's exactly the reason they've given for rejecting the challenge. It's unreasonable yes, but I was in the resident's bay, albeit the signage was not at all clear. Had that one not been removed, I'd have seen it of course and just looked for somewhere else.

What a dreadful response.

OP, would you post your actual challenge pl.

What a dreadful response.

OP, would you post your actual challenge pl.

I sent them exactly what you kindly posted for me to send on page 1.
Cheers

This is a difficult one, because the best signage for adjacent bays like this, is for the two signs to be mounted side-by-side on a single pole at the bays boundary, with arrows on each sign to indicate applicability. But here it is potentially misleading. However whilst in the old Pepipoo there was a successful case on this very situation, you would need a sympathetic adjudicator, because this is not mandatory instruction, just guidance buried somewhere in the TSRGD. Success would depend on the condition of the bay boundary. GSV shows it, but is it clear now ?

Ok thanks. With my luck , I'll meet an adjudicator on a cold wet monday morning who doesn't like my face!
Yes, you can see in the video I posted at 9:20 they are still there. You can see them just behind my rear bumper.
In the 2024 GSV there was a sign right next to where my car was parked, you can see it next to the Mercedes. That would certainly have been clear to me. Why on earth would they remove it?

I guess I just take this one on the chin. I have another one that is totally unjustified that I'll be taking to tribunal if necessary.

Appreciate all your help.

I wouldn't just take it on the chin. We call that joining the Mugged Club. Make them do at least some work for their money. So why not submit an informal challenge pointing out that the signage is badly placed and therefore misleading. State that in situations like this with adjacent bays with different restrictions, the signs should be side-by-side on a single pole at the bay boundary. Post up their response when you get it.

Haha well, I certainly don't wanna be in a mugged club!
However, if my chance of success depends on a sympathetic adjudicator and whether the bay markers are still there ( which they are), that sounds like my odds are slim to none. Especially if the ticket, however unfair, was enforceable according to the rules, in which case I'm gonna end up getting mugged for £160 instead of £80. 

That's not the issue.

At this stage and if you are the registered keeper then you can make formal reps which, even if unsuccessful, would most probably elicit another chance to pay the reduced penalty. At this time we could attack their reasoning in detail.

Ok, my wife will kill me if I lose now, but ok let's do it.
Yes I am the registered keeper. My video is pretty much all the evidence I have.