Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: hirerspcn on July 26, 2025, 04:42:51 pm
-
Ok so i have paid for the first PCN unfortunately.
For the second one i sent the comments via the online portal, which i received a confirmation email. Will my appeal be accepted even after i have received a Charge certificate? I did send an appeal for the first PCN (which i received a rejection) on the portal but it only applied for that specific PCN and not both.
After i received a CC i added comments to say that i sent an appeal for both PCNs (see previous confirmation email)
How long should i wait for the order of recovery, I do not want this to be delayed.
Their log of your PCN shows nothing about representations submitted or responded, so you can get the matter reset to the PCN stage by submitting a Statutory Declaration that you submitted reps but got no rejection, when they register the debt at TEC. They can do this only after the payment period on the CC has expired. It is a routine matter and hundreds if not thousands of these are submitted every year. An in-time submission is accepted automatically, and no reasons are needed, just the relevant box ticked, and, of course the SD can only be signed and dated in the presence of a witness.
So once the CC payment period expires, you should contact TEC about every 7-10 days enquiring whether the PCN has been registered, as it is a very important final statutory enforcement document.
ALternatively you could look on the CoL website record for your PCN, and when the amount goes up by £10, (the TEC registration fee), you don't have to wait for the OfR, you can download Form PE3 from the TEC website.
-
Ok so i have paid for the first PCN unfortunately.
For the second one i sent the comments via the online portal, which i received a confirmation email. Will my appeal be accepted even after i have received a Charge certificate? I did send an appeal for the first PCN (which i received a rejection) on the portal but it only applied for that specific PCN and not both.
After i received a CC i added comments to say that i sent an appeal for both PCNs (see previous confirmation email)
How long should i wait for the order of recovery, I do not want this to be delayed.
-
Is there anyone willing to represent me as i am unable to do so? If not then I will pay while i have the chance to pay the reduced amount.
For the second PCN, where and how can i check the audit trail? I have gone on the portal and it doesnt show the date i submitted the representations, it only shows CC sent and the date.
[img width=499.98846435546875 height=183.99305725097656]https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/5hL59TI.png[/img]
If it doesn't show an entry for your reps and their response, then they didn't receive your reps. How did you send them ? You need to wait for the Order for Recovery, then submit a Statutory Declaration that you submitted reps but did not receive a rejection. It's Form PE3 on the TEC website.
Some people to represent appellants, but it is a very time consuming thing to do. I know Hippocrates does some but I know he is a bit overwhelmed at the moment. I think it is best to pay this one at the discount.
-
Is there anyone willing to represent me as i am unable to do so? If not then I will pay while i have the chance to pay the reduced amount.
For the second PCN, where and how can i check the audit trail? I have gone on the portal and it doesnt show the date i submitted the representations, it only shows CC sent and the date.
(https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/5hL59TI.png)
-
Have you checked the audit trail for the 2nd PCN that you claim to have submitted reps against ?
For the first PCN, whether to take them to London Tribunals is your decision if they have re-offered the discount. If they haven't it is a total no-brainer to take them there as you have nothing more to lose. The problem with sign adequacy is it is subjective, so an adjudicator could agree with you or CoL, it depends on how persuasive your reps are. Your argument is essentially the situation requires two, not one sign, due to risk of obscuration.
-
I did submit reps/comments after i received the charge certificate, i did receive the acknowledgement email for this PCN.
What should i do for the 1st PCN that was rejected? I have ~2 days to pay for the reduced amount, if the advise is to pay.
(https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/25NZjEz.png)
-
@Incandescent
The letter really shows their disgraceful ignorance. Both PCNs were issued under the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003, so have nothing to do with the Transport Management Act 2004. The only common features is (1) owner liability, (2) PCNs cn be served, and (3) there is an adjudication facility. They also refer to making a "Witness Statement" which is the submission for the TMA 2004. The LLA & TfL Act 2003 requires submission of a Statutory Declaration.
It really is disgraceful how ignorant they are.
I'm not clear if you submitted reps against this PCN or not. If you submitted a single representation with references to both PCNs, then you need to wait for the Order for Recovery and submit a Statutory Declaration that you submitted reps, but received no notice of rejection. The form is PE3 and requires that it is witnessed by a solicitor or at your local county court.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/form-pe3-challenge-an-unpaid-penalty-charge-notice
-
@Incandescent
-
I have received a reply for the second PCN which I received a charge certificate for. Any advice please.
Thanks.
(https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/DpnjuuD.png)
(https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/eHjDoD2.png)
-
Any advice on this please
Thanks
Did you get anywhere with the 2nd PCN ?
I did not. I am waiting for a reply
-
Any advice on this please
Thanks
Did you get anywhere with the 2nd PCN ?
-
Any advice on this please
Thanks
-
CoL have rejected my appeal. Please advise on how I should move forward with this. This is only 1 rejection letter out of the 2 PCNs.
Thanks.
(https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/cB0RyLV.png)
(https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/CpvsK13.png)
-
The portal just shows individual PCNs against a VRM not a grouped set.
So your reps were just against one PCN. You had to make reps against both individually or at least cite both in a single challenge.
Let's hope they cancel the CC now you've asked.
-
Post here. This states the relevant PCN number.
https://imgur.com/a/XyGGmK8
-
If you submitted the same reps against each PCN you have nothing to worry about but do you have any browser evidence or such like.
I have submitted 1 appeal which showed both PCNs in the portal. Like so: https://imgur.com/a/M7rfuGm
I have also submitted reps for the charge certificate online and i have explicitly said that my appeal is for both PCNs
-
'I have received a charge certificate even though i submitted an appeal.'
Post here. This states the relevant PCN number.
-
If you submitted the same reps against each PCN you have nothing to worry about but do you have any browser evidence or such like.
-
Did you not even list both of the PCNs ? By not submitting representations against both, you've dropped yourself into the doodoo, because you did not respond to both PCNs, and a Statutory Declaration doesn't cover what has happened here.
I did submit against both. When i enter any PCN number in the portal it shows me both PCNs listed, so i am not sure if the Charge certificate is for one of them or both.
I had a further tought on this, and you might be able to get CoL to cancel the CC if you explain that you intended to send in a single representation covering both PCNs. Worth a go, anyway.
Would i do this by adding information on the portal or do i have to email them?
-
A grovel is indeed your only option saying sorry intended reps to one to be for both and would they kindly cancel the CC and log the same reps against that PCN too.
-
I had a further tought on this, and you might be able to get CoL to cancel the CC if you explain that you intended to send in a single representation covering both PCNs. Worth a go, anyway.
-
No, not explicitly.
My Appeal:
Dear City of London, The contravention did not occur, as the signage as a whole is inadequate under Regulation 18. The evidence shows that only a single sign is positioned on the left-hand side on Old Broad Street. The Department for Transport guidance recommends that restrictions of this nature be signed on both sides of the carriageway to ensure visibility. Kind Regards
Did you not even list both of the PCNs ? By not submitting representations against both, you've dropped yourself into the doodoo, because you did not respond to both PCNs, and a Statutory Declaration doesn't cover what has happened here.
-
No, not explicitly.
My Appeal:
Dear City of London, The contravention did not occur, as the signage as a whole is inadequate under Regulation 18. The evidence shows that only a single sign is positioned on the left-hand side on Old Broad Street. The Department for Transport guidance recommends that restrictions of this nature be signed on both sides of the carriageway to ensure visibility. Kind Regards
-
Did your representations refer to both PCNs ?
-
This is a bit confusing.
I submitted an appeal on 27/08 and i got a reference as one of the letters pcn number. However on my charge certificate it has the other PCN number as reference.
When i go on the portal it shows boths PCNs, would this mean my appeal only went through to one of the PCN and not both? Which could explain why I have 1 charge certificate and not 2.
-
PCN issued Thurs 24 July, therefore deemed served Mon. 28th.
28-day period ended 24th.
You posted draft reps on Aug. 19th.
The only procedural question is when and how did you submit your reps?
Over to you...
-
I have received a charge certificate even though i submitted an appeal.
What do i do from here?
Please post a copy of your reps with date of submission. Did you submit my post and did you get any sort of receipt or acknowledgement?
That said, there is a process to get you back on track. See
https://www.ftla.uk/announcements/charge-certificates-london-local-authorities-and-tfl-act-2003-london-l-1805/
and come back here with any questions.
-
I have received a charge certificate even though i submitted an appeal.
What do i do from here?
-
I am not good at drafting, but here goes:
Dear City of London,
The contravention did not occur, as the signage as a whole is inadequate under Regulation 18. The evidence shows that only a single sign is positioned on the left-hand side on Old Broad Street. The Department for Transport guidance recommends that restrictions of this nature be signed on both sides of the carriageway to ensure visibility.
Kind Regards
-
The matter you raise concerns two Penalty Charge Notices issued by the City of London under contravention code 53, namely failing to comply with a restriction on vehicles entering a pedestrian zone at Old Broad Street. The core issue is whether the restriction relied upon by the authority was adequately and lawfully conveyed to the motorist by traffic signs, and whether any procedural safeguard has been breached such as to render enforcement unlawful.
The statutory obligation rests upon the enforcement authority to ensure that any restriction imposed by a traffic regulation order is properly indicated by signs which are adequate to secure that sufficient information as to the effect of the order is made available to road users. This duty arises under Regulation 18 of the Local Authorities' Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996. The signs themselves must conform with the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016, and where a restriction is imposed by way of a zone entry sign it must remain in force until the driver encounters a corresponding zone end sign. Only then may a different restriction be imposed by a new entry sign.
In the present case, Sign 1, situated at the London Wall end of Old Broad Street, establishes a pedestrian and cycle zone with exemptions for access and local buses. That restriction continues until it is lawfully terminated. There is no evidence of a "Zone Ends" sign on the approach to Broad Street Avenue. Instead, the City has erected Sign 2, which imposes a materially different prohibition, namely a timed restriction between 7am and 7pm with exemption only for local buses. Without an intervening "Zone Ends" sign, Sign 2 has no lawful effect. The Traffic Signs Manual and the TSRGD do not provide for a repeater sign that alters the character of the restriction already in place. In the absence of a proper termination, the motorist is entitled to rely upon the entry restriction as originally signed, which allowed entry for access. This alone provides a substantive ground of representation that the contravention did not occur because the restriction relied upon by the City was not lawfully conveyed.
The second issue concerns adequacy. Even if Sign 2 were treated as valid, the authority must still show that it provided adequate information to motorists. The evidence demonstrates that only a single sign is placed on the left-hand side at Broad Street Avenue. Department for Transport guidance recommends that restrictions of this kind be signed on both sides of the carriageway wherever practicable to ensure conspicuity. Where the only sign is susceptible to obstruction by parked vans or high-sided vehicles, the test of adequacy under Regulation 18 is not satisfied. In Herron v Sunderland City Council [2011] EWCA Civ 902, the Court of Appeal affirmed that signage must be clear and not misleading. Confusion between two successive signs imposing different restrictions without intermediate warning, coupled with poor visibility and single-sided placement, is strong evidence that the signage was not adequate.
There is also a procedural safeguard in play. Under Schedule 1 to the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003, a charge certificate may not be served until 28 days after the deemed date of service of the penalty charge notice. The notices here are dated 24 July 2025 and are deemed served on 28 July 2025. Any attempt to accelerate enforcement prior to the expiry of that statutory period would render proceedings void, as held in Camden LBC v The Parking Adjudicator [2011] EWHC 295 (Admin). It is therefore vital to check dates of any subsequent notices carefully.
Finally, as the vehicle was on hire for less than six months, liability may be transferred to the hirer provided the hire company supplies both a copy of the hire agreement and a statement of liability. From the extracts you have provided, the hire agreement is fully compliant and transfers liability in accordance with the Road Traffic (Owner Liability) Regulations 2000. Accordingly, you are the proper respondent to the PCNs and there is no procedural defence on that ground.
In terms of prospects, you have a credible case to argue that the contravention did not occur on two independent grounds. First, that Sign 2 is without legal effect because there was no intervening zone end sign to terminate the restriction established at Sign 1. Second, that even if Sign 2 is considered valid, the signage taken as a whole was inadequate to satisfy the statutory test under Regulation 18, being confusing, contradictory and not conspicuous. Both arguments should be advanced in your representations to preserve them for adjudication. If the City rejects your representations, you will have the right to appeal to London Tribunals, where an independent adjudicator will determine whether the authority has discharged its burden of proof.
Tactically, it is essential to focus on the legality and adequacy of signage rather than mitigation. You should also scrutinise the enforcement timetable to ensure that the City has complied with all statutory time limits. If they have not, that provides an additional procedural ground to resist enforcement. The recommended course is therefore to submit formal representations on the basis that the contravention did not occur because the signage was neither lawful nor adequate, with the alternative submission that enforcement has been procedurally defective. This maximises your prospects of success both at the representation stage and, if necessary, on appeal.
-
Bump
@Incandescent @H C Andersen
-
Sign 1, the one at the London Wall end of Old Broad St, allows access to premises, but Sign 2 doesn't. So, as you correctly write, we need to know the status of Sign 1; it may not be there anymore. If it's still there, then CoL have a problem, but does it help the OP who wasn't requiring access to premises on Old Broad St.
Sign 1 is still there.
-
To whom is the PCN actually addressed, you or the hire company?
You MAY NOT respond in your own name if it's addressed to another party IRRESPECTIVE of what their terms of contract might be.
It is addressed to me.
The procedure is that the hire company receives Letter > I get notified (by email) > Hire company transfers liability to me > I receive letter in post a week or 2 later
On the subject of the evidence, at which sign were you snapped, the one at the junction of London Wall or the one at the junction with Broad Street Avenue?
IMO, Sign 2 has no legal effect. There's no provision for repeater signs with this prohibition, therefore it's the sign at the London Wall end which applies - but there's no contemporaneous evidence as to its location, condition or visibility. The BSA sign only has effect if you had passed a Zone Ends sign between London Wall and BSA.
Sign 2, Junction with Broad Street Avenue.
There are no other signs after Sign 1 (London wall) apart from the Broad Street Avenue.
Thanks
-
+1, but OP let's deal with the procedural issue first pl.
+1 !!
-
+1, but OP let's deal with the procedural issue first pl.
-
Sign 1, the one at the London Wall end of Old Broad St, allows access to premises, but Sign 2 doesn't. So, as you correctly write, we need to know the status of Sign 1; it may not be there anymore. If it's still there, then CoL have a problem, but does it help the OP who wasn't requiring access to premises on Old Broad St.
-
Thanks.
To whom is the PCN actually addressed, you or the hire company?
You MAY NOT respond in your own name if it's addressed to another party IRRESPECTIVE of what their terms of contract might be.
On the subject of the evidence, at which sign were you snapped, the one at the junction of London Wall or the one at the junction with Broad Street Avenue?
IMO, Sign 2 has no legal effect. There's no provision for repeater signs with this prohibition, therefore it's the sign at the London Wall end which applies - but there's no contemporaneous evidence as to its location, condition or visibility. The BSA sign only has effect if you had passed a Zone Ends sign between London Wall and BSA.
-
If not, I'll paste some snippets from the agreement for PCNs etc:
Commencement Date
08/04/2025 03:05 PM
End Date
30/09/2025 11:59 PM - Less then 6 months
10. RESPONSIBILITY FOR FINES, PENALTIES, AND PCNS
10.1 Hirer's Responsibility: The Hirer agrees to be fully responsible for any and all fines,
penalties, charges, or notices incurred during the rental period. This includes, but is not
limited to, parking tickets, traffic violations, congestion charges, toll charges, and any
other Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) issued by any authority. This clause is in
accordance with the Road Traffic Act 1988 and any applicable regulations.
a. Any of the following offenses which may be committed in relation to that Vehicle
when it is Stationary and when a fixed penalty notice is issued; being on a road
during the hours of darkness Without the lights or reflectors required by law; or
left or being parked, or being loaded or unloaded And the non-payment of charge
made at a street parking place and/or Pay & Display
b. Any fixed penalty offense committed in respect of that vehicle under part iii of
Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 as amended, replaced, or extended by any
subsequent legislation applicable to Scotland, Northern Ireland, or other parts of
the British Isles upon which the vehicle is being used.
c. Any excess charge which may be incurred in respect of that vehicle in pursuance
an Order under Section 45 and 46 of the Road Traffic Act 1984, as amended,
replaced or extended by and subsequent Or orders and under the equivalent
legislation applicable to Scotland, Northern Ireland
d. Any financial penalty or charge which may be demanded by a third party as a
result of the vehicle having been parked or left upon land which is not a public
road.
e. I acknowledge that if I receive a bus lane ticket, G&M Direct Hire will pay the fine
on my behalf. The corresponding amount will then be automatically added to my
next Direct Debit. If the vehicle has already been returned, the amount will instead
be deducted from my deposit.
10.2 Notification and Payment: The Hirer agrees to promptly pay any such fines, penalties,
charges, or notices. In the event that any such fines or penalties are sent directly to the
Owner, the Hirer authorizes the Owner to charge the rente's account or credit card for
the full amount of the fines or penalties plus an administrative fee of £10 for handling
the processing of these fines or penalties. The same charge will apply should the Hirer wish to challenge the representation and requests the Owner to transfer the liability to
them by making representation to the local authority who issued the penalty. This is in
line with the provisions set forth under the Road Traffic (Owner Liability) Regulations
2000.
10.3
Disputes: If the Hirer wishes to dispute any fines, penalties, or PCNs, the Hirer must do
so at their own expense and liability, following the procedures outlined in the Road
Traffic Act 1991. The Owner will provide necessary documentation to assist in the
dispute process if applicable. The Hirer acknowledges their obligation to adhere to the
legal process for disputing fines as prescribed by the Road Traffic Act and any relevant
local authority regulations.
10.4 Indemnification: The Hirer agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Owner from and
against any and all claims, demands, actions, liabilities, losses, or expenses (including
legal fees and costs) arising out of or related to any fines, penalties, or PCNs incurred
during the rental period. This indemnification aligns with the liability provisions under
the Road Traffic Act 1988.
10.5
Reporting: The Hirer must report any fines, penalties, or PCNs received during the
rental period to the Owner immediately upon return of the car. This requirement
ensures compliance with Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 regarding the duty to
provide information as to the identity of the driver.
10.6
Legal Compliance: The Hirer agrees to comply with all relevant road traffic laws and
regulations during the rental period, including but not limited to the Road Traffic Act
1988, the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, and any other applicable legislation. The
renter acknowledges that failure to comply with these laws may result in additional
penalties and charges.
-
OP, can I go back to the start please.
(7)This section applies to a hiring agreement under the terms of which the vehicle concerned is let to the hirer for a fixed period of less than six months (whether or not that period is capable of extension by agreement between the parties or otherwise);
Is this your hire?
If not, then who may be considered to be the owner as far as this legislation is concerned has yet to be determined.
Can i Message you with my hire agreement?
@H C Andersen
-
HCA wants to see the hire agreement I think.
-
Er..NO!
Well the dates are as follows:
Contravention 1: 12/06/2025
Contravention 2: 10/07/2025
Date of Notice for 1&2: 24/07/2025
Date Received: 25/07/2025
Thanks
-
OP, can I go back to the start please.
(7)This section applies to a hiring agreement under the terms of which the vehicle concerned is let to the hirer for a fixed period of less than six months (whether or not that period is capable of extension by agreement between the parties or otherwise);
Is this your hire?
If not, then who may be considered to be the owner as far as this legislation is concerned has yet to be determined.
Sorry I dont understand this point, please can you elaborate. Thanks
-
The deemed date of service of the PCN is 28th July. It is not necessarily the same date as received. This is important when you work out the 28 days in which to make representations.
The other point is that Schedule I para. 5 (2) (a) states they cannot serve a charge certificate until 28 days from the date of service of the PCN:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/2003/3/schedule/1/enacted
(a)where no representations are made under paragraph 1 above, with the date on which the penalty charge notice is served;
This is an infamous paradox.
Is this comment a mistake? Intended for another post?
Er..NO!
-
OP, can I go back to the start please.
(7)This section applies to a hiring agreement under the terms of which the vehicle concerned is let to the hirer for a fixed period of less than six months (whether or not that period is capable of extension by agreement between the parties or otherwise);
Is this your hire?
If not, then who may be considered to be the owner as far as this legislation is concerned has yet to be determined.
-
The deemed date of service of the PCN is 28th July. It is not necessarily the same date as received. This is important when you work out the 28 days in which to make representations.
The other point is that Schedule I para. 5 (2) (a) states they cannot serve a charge certificate until 28 days from the date of service of the PCN:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/2003/3/schedule/1/enacted
(a)where no representations are made under paragraph 1 above, with the date on which the penalty charge notice is served;
This is an infamous paradox.
Is this comment a mistake? Intended for another post?
-
So the signs are correct, it would seem.
Approach signs in either direction on London Wall advise of a restriction. On turning in the sign has an exception for access, which I suspect they don't enforce, as there must be vehicles coming and going all the time for tbe businesses along there like delivery companies etc, so it's a PITA for them dealing with reps from people accessing properties. This figures, because you got a PCN for the next sign which bars all traffic except buses. I think the sign when you turn has been there much longer than the second sign, and they should have removed the first sign, but this is dozy City of London.
However, your problem is that you seem to have missed all the signs ! I'm afraid to say, I see no credible appeal based on the signs in place. There may be a technical appeal based on CoL mismanagement of the enforcement process, but I'll leave that for Hippocrates or others to suggest, as they are much more up-to-speed on this aspect. Such appeals have nothing to do with the contravention at all.
Sorry not to have been of more help.
Its ok, thanks for all the advice.
I have a question though, should there be signs on both sides of the road for a contravention to be valid? In this instance there was only 1 sign on the left hand side, and there were no advance warning for this particular sign.
While i do not remember if there were any vehicles parked on the left hand side, which could have been obstructing my view of the sign, will this help as argument if i wrote it in an appeal?
-
The deemed date of service of the PCN is 28th July. It is not necessarily the same date as received. This is important when you work out the 28 days in which to make representations.
The other point is that Schedule I para. 5 (2) (a) states they cannot serve a charge certificate until 28 days from the date of service of the PCN:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/2003/3/schedule/1/enacted
(a)where no representations are made under paragraph 1 above, with the date on which the penalty charge notice is served;
This is an infamous paradox.
-
So the signs are correct, it would seem.
Approach signs in either direction on London Wall advise of a restriction. On turning in the sign has an exception for access, which I suspect they don't enforce, as there must be vehicles coming and going all the time for tbe businesses along there like delivery companies etc, so it's a PITA for them dealing with reps from people accessing properties. This figures, because you got a PCN for the next sign which bars all traffic except buses. I think the sign when you turn has been there much longer than the second sign, and they should have removed the first sign, but this is dozy City of London.
However, your problem is that you seem to have missed all the signs ! I'm afraid to say, I see no credible appeal based on the signs in place. There may be a technical appeal based on CoL mismanagement of the enforcement process, but I'll leave that for Hippocrates or others to suggest, as they are much more up-to-speed on this aspect. Such appeals have nothing to do with the contravention at all.
Sorry not to have been of more help.
-
Heres a visualisation:
(https://i.imgur.com/tWQHr2J.jpeg)
Advance Sign 1:
(https://i.imgur.com/eX7jFgq.jpeg)
Advance Sign 2:
(https://i.imgur.com/j2WpGYj.jpeg)
Sign 1:
(https://i.imgur.com/2nNquUN.jpeg)
Sign 2*:
(https://i.imgur.com/CamwHoT.jpeg)
*Contravention Sign
-
Does that advance sign apply to both signs on Old broad street which is different? Unless I am mistaken this advanced sign only applies to the sign which is at the entrance of Old broad street.
The entrance sign is for Access only and the contravention sign is for 7am - 7pm
There are no advanced signs for the one past Broad Street Avenue.
Well, only you can tell us, because we have to work with GSV unless you (the OP) provide clear photos of the approach and to the sign that was passed. Is the sign as you turn into Broad Street still there ? Sorry but it is quite difficult to give definitive advice if the signs have all been changed since the latest GSV view.
-
Does that advance sign apply to both signs on Old broad street which is different? Unless I am mistaken this advanced sign only applies to the sign which is at the entrance of Old broad street.
The entrance sign is for Access only and the contravention sign is for 7am - 7pm
There are no advanced signs for the one past Broad Street Avenue.
-
I took a left from London Wall on to Old Broad St, straight past the sign then right onto Liverpool St.
So you would have passed this advance sign: -
https://maps.app.goo.gl/y7EshUEfjhcRCUS28
which has been there since 2018 according to GSV.
I'm afraid it doesn't look good for an appeal based on inadequate signage, except that high-sided vehicles can totally obscure the advance sign as per here: -
https://maps.app.goo.gl/dvRggXZMnoRt3ugq8
-
I took a left from London Wall on to Old Broad St, straight past the sign then right onto Liverpool St.
(https://i.imgur.com/L3lHVF4.jpeg)
-
@Incandescent
So far, you haven't told us your route that took you to the sign barring access. A left turn is typically when signs are missed, and sometimes a right turn.
-
@Incandescent
-
So this road is very busy with no parking available, the road is currently a one way as there are ongoing roadworks, so I wasn't able to take some photos.
What I know for a fact is that there are no advanced signs, there is only 1 sign on the left-hand side. The road prior to the sign is where loading vans are usually parked and in the 1 instance I went, the sign was blocked by the van as I was driving from the opposite direction of the sign.
Sign location: https://maps.app.goo.gl/1rJFd7FMCHexwi98A
Image of sign: https://maps.app.goo.gl/KCmt2iw3JhVudPaD9
Past the sign, if you were to go straight ahead, there is no entry as it is only for buses. You have to turn right onto Liverpool Street.
-
Look out for advance warning signs as well. If this is a bus route with frequent double-deckers, it is inadequate as the sign can be obscured by high-sided vehicles.
-
So really it is your decision. It's very difficult to give an opinion on chance of success without seeing the actual signs on GSV and any advance warning signs. You have drive the route so are in the best position. We see lots of people using satnav and missing signs that are there in front of them; is this you ?
Essentially, there is only 1 sign, the photo in my previous comment. The other day I drove past this road because there are roadworks on Liverpool street and can confirm there is only 1 sign on the left.
I can go there again and take some photos. If I do go there, what photos should I be taking? Just the sign or anything else?
-
Any guidance please
Essentially, it comes down to the question of - is the signage adequate to announce the restriction to the oncoming motorist ? This is the test councils have to meet to satisfy their obligation in Regulation 18 of the The Local Authorities Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996'
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1996/2489/regulation/18
So if you want to take CoL all the way to London Tribunals for an unbiased opinion, the onus would be on you to show that the signs CoL have erected are inadequate to convey the restriction. "Adequate" is subjective, so it comes down to what the adjudicator considers as adequate. Certainly the CoL will not give way on this as they keep your money if you cough-up.
So really it is your decision. It's very difficult to give an opinion on chance of success without seeing the actual signs on GSV and any advance warning signs. You have drive the route so are in the best position. We see lots of people using satnav and missing signs that are there in front of them; is this you ?
-
Any guidance please
-
OK so I totally misinterpreted this PCN. Today I drove past just to get some clarity, and the sign hasn't changed as I thought.
The sign that I thought was changed is the entrance to Old broad street coming in from London Wall or Wormwood street.
The sign that the PCN is referencing is just past Broad Street Avenue, and it looks like the sign has been there for at least 2 years, from this image I found on Google Maps.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/KCmt2iw3JhVudPaD9
This is confusing because I don't ever recall seeing this sign, and if you do go past the sign, you can't go any further ahead as the road markings tell you to turn right (onto Liverpool Street)
There are signs on London Wall (https://maps.app.goo.gl/7Y8nAdd76RASMpxq8) and Wormwood street (https://maps.app.goo.gl/u1dEjhCaDv8RZeCKA) saying Old broad street is local buses and access only, nothing about timed access.
How do I go about this from here?
-
This extract from a refused private hire case may shed some light on this.
-------
Case reference
2250042014
The Notice of Rejection took into account the mitigating point about being able to collect passengers on Old Broad Street. It emphasised that the activity was only prohibited at the specific section of the street in which the vehicle was driven. The activity could be accomplished elsewhere on the street.
There are signs at the entrance to Old Broad Street junction with London Wall/Wormwood Street which indicate the prohibition of motor vehicles except for access and local buses only. We will not enforce against vehicles which drive past these signs to load/unload, drop off/pick up passengers.
However, further along at the junction of Old Broad Street and Broad Street Avenue there is a prohibition traffic sign in place that clearly advise motorists that between the hours of 7am and 7pm Monday to Friday this part of Old Broad Street is a pedestrianised zone and motor vehicles (except local buses) are not permitted to pass this sign. This is the reason the PCN was issued.
-
I don't believe the sign is still there, and that is the latest update from GSV. I have used this street many times prior to these dates and have never received a PCN.
From the image/video, what I can tell is that it says:
Mon - Fri
7 am - 7 pm
Except local
Buses
-
Does access include Liverpool street station? You have to turn right from Old broad street.
The underground station is on the corner of Old broad street and Liverpool Street.
Is the sign on the GSV view of 2024 still the same ?
I dont understand your question.
You posted up a link to GSV from Oct 2024. This shows the sign on Old Broad Street. I believe @Incandescent is asking whether the GSV Oct 2024 sign is still there or has it changed?
I've had look at the video evidence. The videos suggest that the sign present on the dates of the alleged contraventions are different from GSV of Oct 2024.
However the videos are of too poor resolution to read properly. I believe there is now a time restriction that says something like 'Mon-??? 7am-7pm' (please don't rely on that) with three words underneath in a separate section which I can't make out.
-
Does access include Liverpool street station? You have to turn right from Old broad street.
The underground station is on the corner of Old broad street and Liverpool Street.
Is the sign on the GSV view of 2024 still the same ?
I dont understand your question.
-
YOu only get one go at submitting reps for postal PCNs. If they reject them, the next stage is London Tribunals.
The single sign on GSV has no days or times, so is 24x7. However it allows access. This means access to properties along the street, but no further. So please tell us more, and a viable appeal argument may be available.
Is the sign on the GSV view of 2024 still the same ?
-
City of London - Code 53
Failing to comply with a restriction on vehicles entering a pedestrian zone
Old Broad Street: https://maps.app.goo.gl/zLMPUQqGt7DXEePGA
PCN 1: https://imgur.com/a/BSGYI2a
PCN 2: https://imgur.com/a/xnYpS14
I am renting this vehicle and the hire company transferred liability to me as stated in my hire agreement.
------------------------------------------------
I received 2 of the same PCN on different days, and they both show on the PCN portal.
I have used this street hundreds of times before to set down a passenger and was surprised to learn I received 2 PCNs at this location.
Looking at the video, it looks like the council changed the signs from Access only to 7am7pm, and I was not aware of this. Even though I was not aware I do take responsibility, do I have any chance of winning an appeal?
This is the first set of letters I have received from the council, and it doesn't look like I can submit an informal appeal. On the portal I can only submit representations, is this normal?