Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: miirder on September 18, 2025, 10:03:16 pm
-
Some thoughts. A long version which could serve as the basis for an appeal if matters get this far.
...
Hi HC Andersen,
Success! The PCN was cancelled. Thank you for taking the time to write up that appeal, much appreciated!
-
Hi HC Anderson. Thank you for taking the time to write up that, I really appreciate your work. I have submitted my formal representation this evening, lets see what happens!
Regards
K
-
Some thoughts. A long version which could serve as the basis for an appeal if matters get this far.
Dealing with purely procedural matters first:
Are you the addressee on the NTO because only that person may make formal reps. If it's not you, you can still draft for them.
The NTO is dated 20 Oct. therefore deemed served on 22nd which counts as day 1 of the 28-day period the last day of which is 18 Nov.
The NTO seems to comply with regulations as regards its form and content.
They have included two photos which may be inferred as exemplifying the nature and extent of the alleged contravention.
Dear Sir,
PCN *******
I refer to the above, your letter dated **** and Notice to Owner dated 20 Oct.
I am making formal representations on the following grounds:
1. contravention did not occur, and
2. procedural impropriety
Contravention did not occur
As regards the contravention, I shall first refer to the road markings and traffic signs which are present at the site. I cannot find this detail in your photos or relevant reference in your letter and assume that unless the person considering these representations carries out a real or virtual site visit scene setting falls to me.
Road markings
A single yellow line which is placed at the edge of the carriageway. The location lies within a Controlled Parking Zone whose restricted hours are *****.
This marking therefore carries the following meaning:
Waiting of vehicles prohibited for a time that is not continuous throughout the year.
Item 2, Part 4 Sign Table to Schedule 7 to the Traffic Signs etc. Regulations refers (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/7)
This restriction applies for the width of the carriageway to the centre-line and for the full width of the footway to the building line. This is a regulatory marking and restriction whose meaning may not be varied by the traffic authority(the council) as regards making a Traffic Management Order nor the enforcement authority as regards interpretation for the purposes of enforcement of road traffic contraventions.
The council has also placed parking bay markings which are co-linear with the yellow line along one edge i.e. the parking place and yellow line share a common boundary, namely the kerb.
Traffic Signs
I was parked within the parking place markings except to a de minimis degree at my nearside front wheel. Also within the parking place is a traffic sign of the form specified at Item 2 of the Part 4 Sign Table of Schedule 4 to the regulations. This has effect only if it is placed within or in the vicinity of a parking place and therefore a motorist must assume that the location is a parking place specified under a Traffic Management Order made by virtue of the council's powers under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984.
Also situated at the location is a sign which in the main is of the form prescribed at Item 2 of the Part 4 Sign Table of Schedule 7 to the regulations and includes the permitted variant of an arrow pointing to the left. This sign also includes the words '*****' which are not prescribed. The sign does not include a time period and therefore in isolation would mean that it disapplies the footway parking prohibition 24/7 and permits but does not require a vehicle to park with two wheels ONLY on the footway.
These signs are conflicted.
The parking place requires a motorist to park wholly within its boundaries, indeed it is a contravention to do otherwise i.e. a motorist must park with 4 wheels on the footway. HOWEVER, the so-called footway parking dispensation PROHIBITS parking with more than 2 wheels on the footway.
The parking place sign permits parking within the times of ****, HOWEVER, the yellow line PROHIBITS waiting, which includes parking, between exactly the same hours.
There are NO footway markings to signify the limit of permitted footway parking, there are only markings which signify the boundaries of a so-called parking place.
The council believes that my car was in contravention by virtue of a de minimis incursion of my front nearside wheel over the parking place markings which they believe indicate the limit of permitted footway parking. As clearly explained above, the are no such markings.
As regards the footway parking sign, a motorist is in contravention as soon as more than 2 wheels are on the footway therefore, using this frame of reference, the whole of my car was in contravention of the footway prohibition. In addition, my car was parked within the scope of a no waiting restriction during its operational hours, so another contravention. HOWEVER, other than to a de minimis extent I was parked wholly within a parking place during hours when parking IS permitted.
Whether the enforcement authority wishes to advise its traffic authority of this, frankly, dog's breakfast, I leave to you. If you wish to pursue me for the penalty, again I leave this to you. HOWEVER, if I am forced to take the matter to adjudication I shall, at which point the whole picture would be exposed to proper scrutiny.
As regards 'procedural impropriety', the authority's letter belaboured in a cut-and-paste fashion the rights and wrongs of footway parking and did not address the central issues of my representations. This is improper. While the authority is not required to respond in writing, it is required to give due consideration to representations and the letter is objective proof that this has not happened. Notwithstanding past improprieties, I request that proper consideration is given to these representations and the PCN cancelled.
Yours....
OP, pl fill in the blanks and post a clear photo of the footway parking sign pl.
-
OP, pl let me re-read the thread. I've just moved house, so I've not been as engaged with threads as I would have been otherwise.
Hi HC Anderson and Stamford,
I have about 10 days left to make formal representations. I would really appreciate some guidance on drafting formal representations as soon as possible please.
Many thanks
K
-
OP, pl let me re-read the thread. I've just moved house, so I've not been as engaged with threads as I would have been otherwise.
No worries, thank you both. I look forward to your replies.
-
OP, pl let me re-read the thread. I've just moved house, so I've not been as engaged with threads as I would have been otherwise.
-
There's about another 3 weeks to make reps - HC Andersen is around and hopefully will be along. If not I'll do something.
-
I'm sure Mr Andersen will chip in here but this can be made simple - footway parking is signed in this location contrary to the rejection that says it is not allowed there - or complicated if the dog's dinner is addressed.
Hi Stamford,
Are there any resources on here with which I can draft formal representations?
Thanks
-
I'm sure Mr Andersen will chip in here but this can be made simple - footway parking is signed in this location contrary to the rejection that says it is not allowed there - or complicated if the dog's dinner is addressed.
-
Please post up all sides of the NtO (only redact yr name & address - leave all else in).
PLease find the NTO below.
https://ibb.co/jPZTQj5s
https://ibb.co/HLDQsGTy
https://ibb.co/bgCCF6Lj
https://ibb.co/W4CmjJ2j
https://ibb.co/5hFXKsyx
https://ibb.co/WWfCZ6n6
Thanks
-
Please post up all sides of the NtO (only redact yr name & address - leave all else in).
-
If so, simply wait for the NTO and we'll help you draft formal representations.
Hi, thank you all so far for all of the help you've given me. I have just recieved an NTO in the post a few days ago. Is there a preferred way of submitting formal representations? I'd appreciate some help drafting a letter or whatever you may suggest.
Many thanks
K
-
No, you don't need to pay for a lawyer. It does not go to court, but the traffic penalty tribunal. There's some splendid volunteers here who may offer to represent you.
In one of the council pics there is what appears to be a yellow sign taped or cable tied to a post. could that be a notice suspending parking in that area?
Thanks for the reply. I will look into representation when the time comes.
The yellow sign would be a planning permission thing, where the council notifies local residents of proposed building works where they can object etc, I often see them on lamposts near me. It is defintely not a suspended parking sign.
Thanks
-
This is the enforcement process:
https://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/eat/understanding-enforcement-process/parking-penalty-charge-notice-enforcement-process
Are you the registered keeper with current DVLA details?
If so, simply wait for the NTO and we'll help you draft formal representations.
Don't forget, the authority is still 'judge in its own cause' so be prepared for General Melchett to respond i.e. 'If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through.' AKA do you expect the council to change years of administrative practice and pay to remedy its signage debacle just because of your reps?
So, reps rejected; appeal lodged; authority doesn't contest; you win AND then they carry on in their ill-informed, unlawful and merry way to penalise more motorists.
Truth IS stranger than fiction.
I am the registered keeper yes. Its weird as mentioned before, my family has been parking like this for 20+ years, never got a ticket until now. I will keep an eye out for the NTO and will post an update when I recieve it.
Thanks
-
No, you don't need to pay for a lawyer. It does not go to court, but the traffic penalty tribunal. There's some splendid volunteers here who may offer to represent you.
In one of the council pics there is what appears to be a yellow sign taped or cable tied to a post. could that be a notice suspending parking in that area?
-
This is the enforcement process:
https://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/eat/understanding-enforcement-process/parking-penalty-charge-notice-enforcement-process
Are you the registered keeper with current DVLA details?
If so, simply wait for the NTO and we'll help you draft formal representations.
Don't forget, the authority is still 'judge in its own cause' so be prepared for General Melchett to respond i.e. 'If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through.' AKA do you expect the council to change years of administrative practice and pay to remedy its signage debacle just because of your reps?
So, reps rejected; appeal lodged; authority doesn't contest; you win AND then they carry on in their ill-informed, unlawful and merry way to penalise more motorists.
Truth IS stranger than fiction.
-
IMO...
I'd love for this to get to adjudication!
OP, I'll break down the absolute nonsense of the markings and signs.
Thank you for the in depth explanation. From what I understand, Ealing dont have a leg to stand on, as their own signs and markings contradict eachother. What would the next steps for me to take? It looks like going off the letter, I have to wait 28 days for a notice to owner to be sent to me, which I them have to submit a formal representation. Is this typically done in person in a court setting? Do I need to contact a lawyer?
Many thanks
-
Post the PCN and your challenge.
What is the Google Maps location. https://maps.app.goo.gl/VxJbD7V3iYCDCB9B6
Looks like nonsense as they say footway parking is not allowed at this location so have just sent a template.
Have you posted all the council pics? All 6 of the council pictures are in the imgur gallery
The sign suggests 2-wheel up parking on the footway but the yellow line rules that out so the all wheel up bay looks like what it is.
So no contravention.
My challenge is in the imgur gallery as are all 6 of the council pictures
-
IMO...
I'd love for this to get to adjudication!
OP, I'll break down the absolute nonsense of the markings and signs.
1. Let's take the footway parking sign ahead. In combination sith the left-facing arrow this means that, subject to other prevailing limitations, parking of vehs of no more than '1750kg unladen' may park with 2 wheels on the footway.
2. Now for the parking place markings. Item 6 of the Part 4 sign table of Schedule 7 to the Traffic Signs etc. Regs means that the 'edge of carriageway' may be used to indicate one of the longitudinal boundaries of a parking place.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/7
In addition, the traffic sign used is of the form prescribed at Item 2 of Part 4 of Schedule 4 to the Regs and states that parking is permitted for permit holders between the hours of Mon-Sat 10am-8pm and Sun 2pm-8pm.
It is NOT the item prescribed at Item 3.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/4
3. Now for the yellow line. This indicates that waiting, which includes parking, is not permitted from the back of the building line, including the footway(where the so-called parking place is located) to the centre-line of the road. This is within a CPZ whose restrictions are Mon-Sat 10am-8pm, Sun 2pm-8pm. Now where have I seen these hours before??
So, in combination we have:
A parking place whose boundaries are described by one set of longitudinal white markings, one set of perpendicular white markings and the kerb representing the edge of the carriageway. There are NO markings on the carriageway.
Therefore IF a motorist parks wholly within the markings, which they must, then they are IN CONTRAVENTION because the parking traffic sign does NOT permit parking on the footway and therefore the prevailing restriction is the 2-wheel footway parking sign which applies 24/7, BUT YOU HAVE TO PARK WITH 4 WHEELS TO STAY WITHIN THE MARKINGS!
Then we have the yellow line which prohibits parking for all the hours referred to in the traffic sign anyway!
The only lawful outcome is that NO-ONE can park wholly within the markings between the specified hours and that anyone may park a vehicle of no more than 1750kg unladen weight with 2 wheels only within the parking place during unspecified hours.
As most medium-sized electric vehicles tip the scales at more than 1750kg as do many IC-engined vehicles then these aren't permitted on the footway at all and would have to park wholly in the road.
And it looks like this nonsense has persisted for years.
Hey ho!
-
Post the PCN and your challenge.
What is the Google Maps location.
Looks like nonsense as they say footway parking is not allowed at this location so have just sent a template.
Have you posted all the council pics?
The sign suggests 2-wheel up parking on the footway but the yellow line rules that out so the all wheel up bay looks like what it is.
So no contravention.
(https://i.ibb.co/GQ1fBk65/SJVbpPH.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/yKPoLPW.png)
(https://i.ibb.co/VcZwJ4KV/RLoVE0v.png)
(https://i.ibb.co/FbpLBy4f/compCGm.png)
(https://i.ibb.co/svNpPdjM/uF8ZrWw.png)
-
I think if it was me, I would be taking them to adjudication, because the sign is clear, parking where you parked is permitted off-carriageway. There is nothing on the sign to demand you park in a marked bay, and I suspect the resolution that the council MUST pass to allow off-carriageway parking will probably only name the street and nothing else.
Their letter is also complete tosh because they say off-carriageway parking is not permitted at this location when it quite clearly is. I suspect if you register an appeal with London Tribunals they will not contest it, but you'll only find out if you take the matter forward.
-
Firstly, I just discovered this forum so unfortunately have already challenged this and had it denied. Details are below.
All images including PCN images, Notice of decline of challenge letter, my images of position of car at time of PCN, google map showing the area.
https://imgur.com/a/qiultro
As you can see in the images, my wheels are pretty much inline with the curb, any closer and my cars at risk of being sideswiped (this happened to my van a year ago). Additionally, the markings for the bay parallel to the road are non existent or in poor condition. Their pictures conveniently didn’t include images closest to the road (these are attached). This road is a residents permit area of which I am a holder of. I'm aware of the blue sign showing half the car on the pavement and half on the road. With this being a single yellow line, I'm unsure if parking like this would be allowed. My family has NEVER seen cars parked half on the pavement in the 20+ years theyve lived here, so I would be hesitant to be the first person doing so, considering this is a fairly busy road.
If we’re going to be pedantic, their resident permit policy states vehicles over 1.83m in width are not permitted. Curbstone to paver this bay measures 1.825m. The inside of the curb to paver measures 1.67m. I was approx 20cm over the supposed bay. There’s 1.7m of pavement still left, not causing a hindrance to pedestrians. We have been parking in bays on this road for 20 years+, never had a problem until this PCN was served. I have a feeling this was done as they have recently resurfaced this and local roads including the white parking bay lines, although these have not been painted on this road yet, so are still in poor condition.
Any guidance on whether this is worth taking further to tribunal, or if I am indeed in the wrong, would be appreciated
Many thanks
K