Replace point 3 with this:
3) The alleged contravention did not occur: the The London Borough of Hounslow (West Chiswick) (Parking Places) (No.13) Order 2009 provides at item 68 of schedule 4 that there is a bay on Sutton Lane North on the "south-east side, from a point 8.1 metres south of the southernmost wall of No. 22 Sutton Lane North, southwards for a distance of 6.0 metres".
The bay is incorrectly marked and the location where my vehicle was stationary is not within the parking place designated by the order, notwithstanding the presence of bay markings. I refer you to the measurements shown at imgur.com/Z2XUnfT which illustrate the point: if one takes a point 8.1 metres south of the southernmost wall of No. 22 Sutton Lane North, one finds himself almost at the southern end of the bay, rather than at the northern end. If my car was not within a duly designated parking place, the contravention cannot have occurred in any event.
Add https:// to the URL in the representation, I can't do it in the draft above as it otherwise embeds the image into the post.
Google maps suggest it's 135 yards, and the distance is wholly unreasonable because it's out of sight, so if you go and buy a ticket from the machine, by the time you get back to the car you could already have a PCN.
This passage from Antonio Prendi v London Borough of Camden (2100346960, 30 September 2010) (https://drive.google.com/uc?id=1JUL9KHy4YZjzGqojyx6AOD3klXEJC77L) comes to mind:
Whether there is another machine within a reasonable distance will depend on the circumstances and each case will turn on its own facts. However, the Enforcement Authority cannot expect motorists to tramp the streets of their borough trying to find a machine in working order. Going too far away from the parking place may indeed involving entering a different parking zone where, restrictions and charges could differ.
I would take this all the way.
Start by drafting a representation and posting it on here for review.