Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: pen2paper on July 05, 2025, 06:29:07 pm
-
Thank you. My argument is that the road markings cannot be seen on approach due to excessive wear at the time of the alleged infraction - including the presence of the nearby wall, and foliage that obscured them. Essentially, by the time you're parked, it's too late. Even the photographs taken by the CEO are not entirely clear, and the council has not provided TROs relevant to the location, or any metadata as requested, so they are asking me to accept their evidence in good faith.
I'm curious, how worn do road markings need to be before this can be taken into account?
-
I did request material evidence of any signage on the day of the alleged infraction. I can see no examples in any of their images.
The signs are clear i.e. they comprise the DYL and double kerb blip road markings which signify no waiting 24/7 and no loading 24/7.
The blips are as clear in their photos as in GSV from 1 year ago.
IMO, you would not convince an adjudicator on the issue of signs.
From the Act:
64General provisions as to traffic signs.
(1)In this Act “traffic sign” means any object or device (whether fixed or portable) for conveying, to traffic on roads or any specified class of traffic, warnings, information, requirements, restrictions or prohibitions of any description—
(a)specified by regulations made by the [F1relevant authority] , or
(b)authorised by the [F1relevant authority] ,
and any line or mark on a road for so conveying such warnings, information, requirements, restrictions or prohibitions.
My emphasis.
-
I did request material evidence of any signage on the day of the alleged infraction. I can see no examples in any of their images.
-
I've just updated my post with a pic of last year which is pretty clear. But the fact you missed this is a factor but they don't agree.
-
Absolutely. They were covered in yellowing leaves on the day and were already worn. Couldn't see them on approach, certainly.
-
I can see why you missed that - not an obvious place for loading blips.
It was though clear with a sign last June:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/X8mMn4tQq543RfTQ7
(https://i.imgur.com/5sjIY0p.png)
(https://i.ibb.co/nM0GPscX/IMG-1962.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/RTY2PKSt/IMG-1965.jpg)
-
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1jVMinRS9As8CIPKWI1RDk3ZbmoB1Gtyo?usp=drive_link
https://maps.app.goo.gl/myCaptP714nYavks8
-
Please have a read of this post and let us see the PCN and relevant photos.
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/
-
Good afternoon,
Motability vehicle parked in good faith with valid blue badge, two disabled occupants and a young child (Waterside, Stratford-Upon-Avon) on double yellows ahead of a bus stop (with good clearance) and directly behind a string of designated bays that were all occupied.
Returned to vehicle to find PCN on windscreen. Two pairs of no loading lines to the left of the vehicle can barely be seen - very worn - that went unnoticed on approach in part due to there also being a wall to the left of the road, and parking tight as to not obstruct traffic. No pavement impeded. No signage in CEO's photographs - no timestamp/metadata evidence provided despite request - merely an assurance. One pair of kerb blips are actually painted over a drain that was covered in leaves. Response from local council (abridged) stating they are unable to advise further until NTO issued:
"Code 02, AWC, FWC, DNS, No loading unloading . blue badge time clock seen. Sign and lines checked. No note on dash. No dispensation or permit."
"I would add that legislation dictates that signage is not required when there are clear double yellow lines in place, accompanied by double kerb markings, as this would indicate that no loading is permitted at any time [...] In response to your comments advising that you were not causing an obstruction, please note that PCNs are served to all vehicles that fail to park in adherence to the parking restrictions, irrespective of the opinion of the driver, which is subjective [...] I acknowledge that you have made reference to a different case where the PCN was cancelled however, all challenges are investigated individually on an impartial basis in line with the council's policy. Therefore, this would have no bearing on the case."
Grateful for any advice, please. Cheers,