The restricted zone entry sign is not prescribed as the lower panel contains the word ”taxis”. See Part 4 in the regs (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/5/made) where there is no mention of the word”taxis”. Also, the small yellow sign near to where you parked is not prescribed for use in a restricted zone since it also contains the word”taxis”. See Part 3 item 4 in the regs (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/4/made) where “taxis” is not a permitted variant.
In summary, your challenge is
There was nothing about the feature of the carriageway, whether by marked lines or a change in surface colour/texture to bring to my attention that the location was a taxi rank and after researching it has come to my attention that the “taxis” element on the lower panel of the restricted zone entry sign is not prescribed under Schedule 5, Part 4 of the TSRGD 2016 and that the use of the word “taxis” on the upright yellow sign near to where I parked, is not prescribed under Schedule 4, Part 3 Item 4. Therefore the Council has placed unlawful signage. Had the Council followed the law and signed the taxi rank in accordance with the TSRGD 2016 the contravention could have been avoided. The statutory guidance issued by the secretary of state instructs the following:
"Authorities should not issue
PCNs when traffic signs or road markings are incorrect, missing or not in accordance with the
TRO. These circumstances may make the order unenforceable. If a representation against a
PCN shows that a traffic sign or road marking was defective, the authority should accept the representation because the adjudicator is likely to uphold any appeal."
Furthermore, the contravention description of “Parked on a taxi rank” is no longer prescribed. The correct wording in the circumstances relating to this PCN is “waiting on a taxi rank” as prescribed by the statutory guidance issued by the secretary of state under Annex B: Contravention codes for civil parking enforcement, England-wide. By failing to adhere to the guidance the Council has once again shown disregard and committed a procedural impropriety requiring the penalty to be cancelled.