Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: Kiz420 on March 11, 2026, 03:48:31 pm
-
This case was lost but not the same road.
--------
Case reference 2260038396
Appellant xxxx
Authority London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham
VRM KY19PEL
PCN Details
PCN HZ79374116
Contravention date 24 Oct 2025
Contravention time 20:10:00
Contravention location Rowan Road
Penalty amount GBP 160.00
Contravention Parked restricted street during prescribed hours
Referral date -
Decision Date 23 May 2026
Adjudicator Lola Moses
Appeal decision Appeal refused
Direction Full penalty charge notice amount stated to be paid within 28 days.
Reasons
Introduction
1. This appeal concerns a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) issued for parking in a restricted street during prescribed hours. The appeal was determined following a postal appeal.
Appellant’s Case
2. The Appellant submits that the contravention did not occur because the Controlled Parking Zone (“CPZ”) signage was inadequate. The Appellant states that they entered Rowan Road from Hammersmith Road and that there was no visible CPZ entry sign at the point of entry indicating that restrictions applied from 8:30am to 11pm. The Appellant relies on photographs said to show the absence of signage and contends that the Enforcement Authority has failed to establish that adequate signage was present at all entry points.
3. The Appellant further submits that the controlled hours had only recently been extended to 11pm and that for many years parking had been unrestricted after 6:30pm, giving rise to a legitimate expectation. The Appellant also states that once aware of the extended hours, they regularly paid for parking via RingGo.
Enforcement Authority’s Case
4. The Enforcement Authority relies on the relevant Traffic Management Order (TMO), namely The Hammersmith and Fulham (Free Parking Places, Loading Places and Waiting, Loading and Stopping Restrictions) (Amendment No. 34) Order 2025. The Enforcement Authority states that the vehicle was parked on a single yellow line within Controlled Parking Zone A at 20:10, during operational hours of 8:30am to 11pm.
5. The Enforcement Authority relies on the CEO photographs, CEO notes, the CPZ map, and photographs of CPZ entry signage. The Enforcement Authority states that the revised restriction hours came into force on 15 September 2025 and submits that the signage adequately conveyed the restriction.
Findings and Conclusion
6. I am satisfied from the CEO photographs that the vehicle was parked on a single yellow line and that the PCN was correctly issued. The issue in dispute is whether the restriction was adequately signed.
7. The burden rests on the Enforcement Authority to establish, on the balance of probabilities, that the restriction was adequately conveyed to a reasonably diligent motorist. In accordance with Herron v Sunderland City Council [2011] EWCA Civ 902, signage need only be substantially compliant, clear and adequate.
8. I am satisfied that the Enforcement Authority has discharged that burden in this case. The evidence includes photographs of CPZ entry signs for Zone A displaying the operational hours of 8:30am to 11pm together with a CPZ map identifying the zone boundaries and entry points. The signage shown is compliant and clearly conveys the restriction. I also note that the Appellant’s own photographs largely focus on Rowan Road itself rather than conclusively demonstrating the absence of signage at the relevant entry point from Hammersmith Road.
9. I accept that the restriction hours had recently changed and that the Appellant may previously have been accustomed to unrestricted parking after 6:30pm. I also accept that the Appellant subsequently complied with the restrictions by paying through RingGo. However, those matters do not establish that the signage was inadequate at the material time and amount, at their highest, to mitigation only. An adjudicator has no power to allow an appeal on mitigation grounds alone.
10. I am therefore satisfied that the restriction was adequately signed and that the contravention occurred.
Decision
11. The appeal is refused.
-
Anything in the refusal in my favour?
They say they've investigated the signage and say its sufficient and meets statutory requirements, but they've only posted a library photo, not the actual sign. This is the point at issue. So if you think it really is inadequate, you should wait for the Notice to Owner, forgoing the discount and submit reps again. You need to put in photos as well as if they reject your reps, they will be what an adjudicator will see at London Tribunals.
It's either this, or pay the £80
-
@stamfordman, @Incandescent
Apologies. just looking for a bit of guidance
-
Anything in the refusal in my favour?
-
Attach/host the rejection.
56 days applies only to replying to reps made to a notice to owner or postal parking PCN.
https://imgpile.com/p/YbK9ki0
I believe I spoke to soon in the morning saying I hadn't received a reply as of yet.
I'm assuming they monitor these forumns
-
Attach/host the rejection.
56 days applies only to replying to reps made to a notice to owner or postal parking PCN.
-
Shall I copy and paste the challenge refused or attach?
-
So I have received a reply on the 56th day via email rejecting the reps
Does it matter that I recieve the letter after 56 days?
-
The pics just show the car in situ on a short yellow line but presumably in the CPZ that is now operational until 11pm.
The entry sign issue is the only thing I can think of.
(https://i.ibb.co/tPbY892p/Screenshot-2026-03-12-at-16-55-42.png)
-
im going to guess there is a 50/50 chance at the tribunal winning?
Not quite. Some appeals are absolute slam dunkers, others are no hopers. We do try to give some idea of likelihood of success, but can never promise a win. Of course, if the council reject your reps and don't re-offer the discount, it is then a total no-brainer to take them to adjudication because the penalty remains the same. If you win, you pay nothing, and if you lose, you pay the PCN penalty, but there are no additional costs at all.
Cool.
Ill draft something up and put it up here.
thanks
-
What are the PCN number and VRM.
HZ59277183 PCN no
VRM: ll23vtp
-
im going to guess there is a 50/50 chance at the tribunal winning?
Not quite. Some appeals are absolute slam dunkers, others are no hopers. We do try to give some idea of likelihood of success, but can never promise a win. Of course, if the council reject your reps and don't re-offer the discount, it is then a total no-brainer to take them to adjudication because the penalty remains the same. If you win, you pay nothing, and if you lose, you pay the PCN penalty, but there are no additional costs at all.
-
What are the PCN number and VRM.
-
im going to guess there is a 50/50 chance at the tribunal winning?
-
You have grounds based on the sign not being visible to a motorist driving past.
However, don't expect them to roll over and cancel, because absolutely vast sums are now being made in London from parking and traffic offences. Think of something like £700 million-plus. Certainly not conducive to councils applying unbiased judgements to representations against a PCN ! This means if you want an unbiased opinion on your case, you have to take them to London Tribunals, but have to risk the full PCN penalty.
-
it used to be 6:30 :D
That is the only sign when entering into the road.
I turned immediatley left into blacks road from hammersmith roundabout which leads in angel walk and that is the only sign.
check google gemini and they say the same thing.
any grounds to make reps?
-
Never, ever, guess single-yellow line times ! As for the sign being twisted round, is there a sign on the other side ?
Certainly the council is extremely unlikely to give way, making an appeal to London Tribunals the only place to get an unbiased judgement. This means you would have to risk the full PCN penalty as there is no discount option at adjudication.
-
Hello Everyone
I got a ticket parking on a yellow line in Hammermsith.
It seems me thinking the yellow line after 6:30pm was ok to park was wrong.
Is there any way of getting it cancelled by making represensations?
I have attached a picture of the CPZ sign being away from the road while entering Hammersmith.
Will that be enough to get it cancelled?
https://imgpile.com/p/Vs7xmWE#IzRYYsR - ticket
https://imgpile.com/p/Vs7xmWE#bi9tpWt - view of CPZ sign
Thanks