Free Traffic Legal Advice

Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: Billybon8843 on March 19, 2026, 05:31:22 pm

Title: Re: Chichester DC - PCN given - council rejected and used old street view
Post by: Billybon8843 on March 19, 2026, 08:03:26 pm

I find their reason to reject my appeal a case to cancel anyway as there were using a near 2 year old Google street view, when the sign isn’t even there now!

Title: Re: Chichester DC - PCN given - council rejected and used old street view
Post by: Incandescent on March 19, 2026, 07:41:12 pm

Some real tosh in their reply. A sign on the opposite side of the road does not apply to both sides. They are either thick and stupid or being mendacious, the latter, methinks.

Title: Re: Chichester DC - PCN given - council rejected and used old street view
Post by: Billybon8843 on March 19, 2026, 06:48:21 pm

Done - thank you

Title: Re: PCN given - council rejected and used old street view
Post by: catnip on March 19, 2026, 05:39:29 pm

Please have a look at this post and let us see the PCN and confirm the location:
https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/read-this-first-before-posting-your-case!-this-section-is-for-council-tfl-dartme/

Title: Chichester DC - PCN given - council rejected and used old street view
Post by: Billybon8843 on March 19, 2026, 05:31:22 pm

Hi all, I’d appreciate some advice on whether I have grounds to take this to adjudication.

Background:
   •   Location: Ashfield Road, Midhurst
   •   Contravention: Parked on single yellow line during restricted hours
   •   Informal challenge submitted and rejected

Council - Chichester District Council
Key issue: signage

The restriction relies on a nearby sign which I believe is not compliant:
   • Mounted unusually low (approx. 3ft on a wall)
   • Heavily faded – symbol is almost completely worn
   • Partially obscured by moss/vegetation
   • Only legible text is: “Mon–Sat 8am–6pm”
   • At night (when I parked) it was very difficult to see

With the symbol illegible, the sign is ambiguous and doesn’t clearly convey the restriction.

Council rejection – incorrect evidence
   • Council said there is an additional sign opposite my vehicle
   • They provided a photo, but it appears to be from Google Maps (dated June 2024)
   • That sign is no longer there and was not present at the time (Feb 2026)
   • I have photos from the same position confirming its absence

So their decision appears to rely on outdated evidence.

Legal angle (as I understand it):
   • Restrictions must be clearly conveyed (TSRGD 2016 / TMA 2004 guidance)
   • Authorities shouldn’t enforce where signage is missing, unclear or misleading
   •   In this case:
   •   Sign is faded/obscured
   •   Meaning is unclear
   •   Supporting signage claimed by council does not exist

Do I have a case to get the PCN cancelled? I’m planning on doing a second appeal very soon.

Pictures
https://storage.to/c/GnNHpBQLM