Free Traffic Legal Advice

Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: Nick325i on January 09, 2026, 09:53:16 am

Title: Re: Failing to comply with a no entry restriction
Post by: Incandescent on January 10, 2026, 07:27:16 pm
Having just looked at their video, I have to say this would not come under de minimis, sorry to have to say. So you're better to go with Hippocrates appeal grounds
Title: Re: Failing to comply with a no entry restriction
Post by: Hippocrates on January 10, 2026, 04:29:29 pm
Sorry as I am always busy with live cases at the Tribunal and have little time to examine videos. Other colleagues do. By all means wait for their advice.

@stamfordman is an expert at this.
Title: Re: Failing to comply with a no entry restriction
Post by: Nick325i on January 10, 2026, 01:53:51 pm
Thank you Hippocrates. So as far as I can see an appeal using the wording below is what i should be using and nothing further to do with the contravention?

"The PCN 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. So, it follows that it cannot possibly be interpreted disjunctively."
Title: Re: Failing to comply with a no entry restriction
Post by: Hippocrates on January 09, 2026, 04:40:07 pm
See the 1st link in my profile please.
Title: Re: Failing to comply with a no entry restriction
Post by: Nick325i on January 09, 2026, 04:24:11 pm
Apologies

(https://i.postimg.cc/XZ2nzctV/Screenshot-2026-01-09-162248.png) (https://postimg.cc/XZ2nzctV)
Title: Re: Failing to comply with a no entry restriction
Post by: Incandescent on January 09, 2026, 10:52:43 am
Sorry, but you've blanked out too much ! Please read this and update your thread accordingly: -
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/
Title: Failing to comply with a no entry restriction
Post by: Nick325i on January 09, 2026, 09:53:16 am
Not sure if this is even worth an appeal. saw a parking spot down a road and stupidly decided to reverse down the road to park instead of driving around the block and was caught on camera. Just thought I would ask in case there is anything i can appeal on?

(https://i.postimg.cc/PvyFgr2q/PXL-20260108-163611403.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/PvyFgr2q)

(https://i.postimg.cc/V0gHxLD9/PXL-20260108-163618970.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/V0gHxLD9)