Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: TitoMW on June 03, 2026, 11:54:33 am
-
We or I at least think Newham's event signage is defective particularly for days outside the signed ones.
I posted a case here:
https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/newham-pcn-code-12-parked-in-a-residents-zone-without-a-valid-permit/
Also, I found a case indicating they may not have authorisation to sign more than one event on zone entry signs.
-----------
Case reference 2250234820
Appellant Chloe Arnold
Authority London Borough of Newham
VRM SX64EFL
PCN Details
PCN PN21502865
Contravention date 29 Dec 2024
Contravention time 09:56:00
Contravention location Ham Park Road
Penalty amount GBP 130.00
Contravention Parked resident/shared use without a valid permit
Referral date -
Decision Date 29 Jul 2025
Adjudicator Edward Houghton
Appeal decision Appeal allowed
Direction cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and the Notice to Owner.
Reasons I heard this appeal by video link.
The Appellant’s case is essentially that there was no signage in the immediate vicinity to inform her that the day in w question was an event day. This may be so. However the Council clearly relies on this information being given on Controlled Zone signage which the motorist must pass in order to reach the eventual parking place – a standard form of stadium signage.
In the present case, however, although plans have been provided together with photographs of the signs relied on, these are of very poor quality and do not clearly show either the location of the signs or the location where the vehicle parked. I am not satisfied this evidence is sufficient to prove what is needed to be proved, namely that the Appellant could not have reached her parking place without passing such a sign.
I would also add that the Secretary of State’s authorisation for the sign allows the lower panel to be varied to the “date of the next event” – not the date of the next event and the event following that.
The Appeal must therefore be allowed
-
Hi all,
I would appreciate some advice on a Newham Event Day PCN which I am considering taking to London Tribunals.
The PCN was issued at 18:19 on Sunday 30 November 2025 for parking in a permit holder bay during an alleged Event Day restriction. The bay sign stated permit holders only Monday to Friday 9am to 6pm, with a second line underneath stating "On Event Days 8am to 9pm".
I am not a Newham resident and this was my first experience of the borough's Event Day parking scheme. There was nothing on the bay sign explaining how a motorist is supposed to identify an Event Day, where that information can be found, or whether they are expected to check CPZ entry signs, websites, or any other source. There was no QR code, web address, or direction to further information.
The council relies on CPZ entry signs displaying the next Event Day. However, from the route I approached, the relevant sign appears to be approximately 0.4 miles away from where I parked. The Event Day information is the bottom line on a sign at a busy junction with multiple competing visual distractions including a roundabout, give-way markings, traffic and parked vehicles. I find it difficult to accept that a reasonably diligent motorist could be expected to notice and retain this information.
In the council's own photographs, the CEO appears to be using a flashlight at 18:19, suggesting visibility conditions were already poor. It is also entirely possible that any CPZ sign could have been obscured by larger vehicles such as buses during my approach.
After parking I travelled via the station and saw no prominent indication that an event was taking place. As someone who does not live locally and does not follow football or stadium events, I had no independent reason to believe special restrictions were in force.
Interestingly, Newham's Event Day parking webpage states:
"Please note that kick off times and dates can occasionally change last minute. Newham Council cannot accept responsibility for the content of external websites and any information relied upon is at your own risk."
This seems problematic given that motorists are effectively expected to obtain Event Day information from sources beyond the bay signage itself.
I have also found two London Tribunals decisions which appear highly relevant:
2240208187
2240495930
In both cases the adjudicator allowed the appeal because the bay signage did not adequately explain how motorists could identify Event Days and because motorists parking in permit bays are entitled to rely on the restrictions displayed on the bay sign itself.
Separately, I successfully filed a Witness Statement with the Traffic Enforcement Centre after not receiving the original Notice to Owner. The Charge Certificate has since been revoked and the case reset whereupon I reappealed the notice to owner and received this current notice of rejection yesterday - 2nd June.
I have attached a Google Drive folder containing the evidence referred to in this post inc:
* The Notice of Rejection letter;
* My formal representation appeal as a google doc
* Relevant screenshots and photographs supporting my position;
Google Drive folder:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/10ps3BN9VWHdNqtKtp5gCsInVhjJCd_xM?usp=sharing
Location where driver parked:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/YomT8WTxu9tqQ93x8
CPZ sign/location relied upon by the council:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/rEjvzshfQZRnfunD8
My questions are:
1. Do members think the tribunal decisions above are sufficiently on point to give me a realistic prospect of success?
2. Has anyone successfully challenged Newham Event Day signage on similar grounds recently?
3. Are there any additional arguments, case law, or evidence I should obtain before submitting formal representations and potentially proceeding to tribunal?
Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated - I do believe this is predatory by Newham Council and goes against common sense.