Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: SimonK on July 23, 2026, 12:21:06 pm
-
@Hippocrates Congrats on your win!
I did see your case on the London Tribunals register, but that alone would not be a reason why my PCN is paid/cancelled.
The council are unaware of my appeal yet, but my appeal would be loosely similar to yours.
I note there are at least 11 cases that have won on inadequate lighting since 2021, but there are also 14 that have failed.
Is your toolkit freely available?
-
@SimonK Please forget AI etc. Re cases: one cannot always infer from any cases what and how issues were argued.
Ai= three-toed sloth. Good Scrabble word and that's all.
It really is essential that you follow the advice on this forum. Plus, we have a well-tested toolkit to fight PCNs which goes far beyond DIY appeals.
Case won yesterday. I was the representative and the appellant did a lot of work so that a skeleton argument was not necessary.
2260060952
Contravention Using a route restricted to certain vehicles
Referral date -
Decision Date 22 Jul 2026
Adjudicator Sabina Powar
Appeal decision Appeal allowed
Direction
cancel the Penalty Charge Notice.
Reasons
This is a personal appeal against a penalty charge notice.
The Appellant attended the hearing remotely on Microsoft Teams and was represented by Phillip Morgan.
The Enforcement Authority did not appear , but have provided written representations and evidence for consideration at the appeal hearing.
The Appellant states that at the time of the alleged contravention that the road signage at the location was poorly illuminated.
The Appellant says that they returned to the location on 2/12/2025 at 11.40pm and on 29/12/2025 in the early morning and took photographs of the signage at the location.
The Appellant has provided those photographic images as evidence in this appeal.
The Appellant also argues that the notice of rejection in error conflates the words “service (delivery)”.
The Appellant further submits that the PCN also has in their words,
"a procedural issue as it is missing mandatory information as provided at Para. 4 (8) (v) of
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/2003/3/section/4/enacted
(v)that, if the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period, an
increased charge may be payable.
Clearly, this refers to Para. 4 (8) (iii):
(iii)that the penalty charge must be paid before the end of the period of 28 days
beginning with the date of the notice;
Therefore, it follows that the statement: "If you fail to pay the Penalty Charge or make
representations before the end of a period of 28 days beginning with the date of service
of this notice an increased charge of £240 may be payable." adds to the lack of clarity
by its omission. Even on its own, whether the required information was included or not,
it is also arguable that it conflates the two periods using the word "or" which many would
view as being conjunctive. Furthermore, even if the statement were to be interpreted
disjunctively, there is still no clarity due to the missing information "
The Enforcement Authority have provided , inter alia, photographic images, CCTV , witness statements, copy of the penalty charge notice , the notice of rejection and original representations made.
They state that the Appellants motor vehicle drove through a route restricted to buses, taxis, pedal cycles and emergency vehicles.
The Enforcement Authority maintain that there is clear illuminated signage on both sides of the road at the location and that they are satisfied that the signage informs motorists as to the upcoming restriction. The Enforcement Authority submit that the lights from motor vehicles driving in the location assist to illuminate the signage. They further maintain that there are white directional arrows on the road to motorists as to which lane they should be driving in and that the sign “ Bus Gate ” is visible to motorists on the carriageway.
The Enforcement Authority say that the penalty charge wording is set and approved by the Secretary of State and cite case reference number 2250662631 where the wording was challenged and approved.
I find that the Appellant has satisfied me on the balance of probabilities that the signage at the location was not adequately illuminated at the time of the alleged contravention. At the time the Appellant was at the location it was 10.13pm in late November, it had been raining and the roads are shown as wet and reflective on the CCTV footage. Other motor vehicles are captured on the CCTV to be following the Appellants motor vehicle into the restricted lane. There are no other motor vehicles that can be said to be assisting to illuminate the road signs. I accept the photographic images provided by the Appellant and his evidence as to when they were taken by the Appellant. These depict the sign to the Appellants left as not illuminated. Whilst the sign to the right is illuminated by the time the Appellant was aware of it I find he had already committed to the manoeuvre to drive into the left lane because of where it is positioned. The CCTV footage shows the “ Bus Gate” sign and any directional arrows for the Appellant to be hardly visible in the weather conditions which prevailed at the time.
The photographs provided by the Enforcement Authority which show all the signs being illuminated appear to have been taken on a fine evening and are not dated. They are not taken on the same evening as the alleged contravention as the rainy , dark weather conditions are not captured in them as they have been by the CCTV footage.
I therefore grant this appeal,
In relation to the points made about the wording of the penalty charge notice I find that the penalty charge notice was correctly worded and I find that I am persuaded by the decision in the case reference number 2250662631 in this finding.
The notice of rejection does appear to have incorrectly conflated the words “ service ( delivery ) “ , an Appellant has 28 days from service of the notice of rejection to pay or appeal to the Adjudicators office.
I find that there has been no contravention and the appeal is allowed.
*******
Not binding on others, of course, but this illustrates the contents and size of my toolkit, as it were.
Sorry but I have forgotten how to get rid of the smiley guy!
-
I live near this thing. Lost many a hub cap to it over the years!
-
Are you the keeper and is the V5C in your name.
Unlikely though a PCN would have already been sent to and paid by a lease or rental firm.
My wife is the keeper/owner and I am the other named driver on the insurance policy.
-
There has been a recent win at London Tribunals here (last couple of days). This may explain their screen response to your PCN.
Interesting and thank you for that!
That would have to be a huge win and bring into question the entire bus gate restriction.
I've spent the past week reading the cases on here and the BusGates website (thank you to the person who provided such a detailed resource).
I have also fed 5 years worth of appeal decisions (approx 370) into AI to work out my best chance of appeal that corresponds with my own individual genuine circumstance. It came up with some very interesting stats including the accept/reject rates of individual adjudicators - not that we can choose who looks at the appeal.
-
Are you the keeper and is the V5C in your name.
Unlikely though a PCN would have already been sent to and paid by a lease or rental firm.
-
There has been a recent win at London Tribunals here (last couple of days). This may explain their screen response to your PCN.
-
Are you sure about the date you drove through the bus gate, because my calendar tells me it is the 23rd July today ?
Apologies, I drove through on the 19th July and have corrected my initial post.
-
Are you sure about the date you drove through the bus gate, because my calendar tells me it is the 23rd July today ?
-
Can you submit a challenge? Please don't as I am just asking.
I am able to click the button to challenge the PCN which then leads me to a form to do so. Obviously I'm not going to do anything just yet.
My thoughts are to wait for 7 days and see if a PCN arrives in the post and keep checking the status online.
-
Can you submit a challenge? Please don't as I am just asking.
-
I hope this is the correct place to post this.
On the night of Sunday 19th July I accidentally drove through the Camrose Avenue bus gate.
I'll provide details in due course, but one thing I'm hoping one of the regulars from this forum can answer...
Before receiving the PCN by post, I typed in my number plate to the Harrow Council website and sure enough, it came up with an image and video of the alleged contravention.
The strange this was that the field Payment Status was marked as "Balance Paid" even though I haven't yet paid it.
What should I do?
(https://snipboard.io/EuAh2U.jpg)