Free Traffic Legal Advice

Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: tommytbone on January 19, 2026, 09:36:09 pm

Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on April 22, 2026, 09:12:43 pm
Thanks Tincombe, appreciate you laying it out clearly.

I'm in agreement with you, no signs no penalty. I'm going to take it to the adjudicator.
I've never done this before but will work through it and any tips would be graciously appreciated.
Like, do i add same reasons for appeal as per the ones i raised to council?

Shortened version from @Stamfordman earlier:

"Contravention did not occur. For an off-street contravention the terms of the car park must be displayed including what can be penalised and no such terms are posted at the location."

Thanks so much again for your support so far!
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tincombe on April 21, 2026, 10:24:47 am
The council allege that the contravention occurred in a CAR PARK.

A CAR PARK cannot be part of a Controlled Parking Zone.

IMO, the Ts and Cs relate and are totally restricted to CPZs and roads.

You were in/on neither.

Whether the council allow holders of WSN permits to park on estate land is a matter for them, but IMO it HAS to be made clear by separate signs and notices that failure to comply means a penalty may be demanded.
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on April 20, 2026, 09:24:28 pm
A case yesterday where the adjudicator was alert to lack of off-street signage.

-------------

Case reference 2250668310
Appellant Mauricio Soffiati
Authority London Borough of Tower Hamlets
VRM FR19YUE
PCN Details
PCN TT60119828
Contravention date 30 Sep 2025
Contravention time 10:27:30
Contravention location Ocean North Estate X213
Penalty amount GBP 160.00
Contravention Parked in a restricted area in a car park
Referral date -
Decision Date 15 Apr 2026
Adjudicator Mackenzie Robinson
Appeal decision Appeal allowed
Direction
cancel the Penalty Charge Notice.

Reasons
Mr Soffiati parked his vehicle on double yellow lines with his blue badge and clock on display. It seems clear that he thought he was parking on a restricted street, using the exemption provided by his blue badge.
The authority contests the appeal on the basis that the area is part of a car park, and the rules of the car park apply even to the double yellow lines. It maintains that display of a blue badge would provide no exemption, because blue badge holders within the car park should park in the designated disabled bays.
I have seen little evidence that this road is part of a car park. I have seen no official plan of the area, or the signage which would normally accompany a car park. The photographs taken by the civil enforcement officer appear to show an ordinary road with double yellow lines combined with no car parking signs in sight.
Assuming that the authority is correct, and this area is part of a car park, the question is whether that was adequately brought to the attention of the driver, so that he ought to have realised the display of his blue badge would provide no exemption from the double yellow lines. Since I have seen no indication of the rules for parking in the area, such as a sign setting out the rules for parking, I do not find that Mr Soffiatt was given adequate information. In those circumstances, no contravention occurred.
This appeal is allowed.

Thanks @stamdfordman.
Just trying to get myself clued up what i'm working with here.... It sounds like the council believe they are covered as residential permit terms state you need to parked in a bay (see website above) - but they enforcement officer used the wrong code 86 instead of on-street code 24.
Does that sound like the right summary?

https://www.walthamforest.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2023-10/T52b%2823%29%20-%20Made%20Traffic%20Orders%20%28TMO%29%20-%20WSN%20extn%20off%20street.pdf

This document makes things more confusing as they class all of these bays as off-street but they've not put in any signage to distinguish that
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on April 20, 2026, 09:16:05 pm
To be expected however, your reps give you a template for any appeal.

Their reference to 'traffic signs' is total nonsense.

The sign is prescribed under Schedule 4 of these regs: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/introduction

SCHEDULE 4
Upright signs that control waiting, loading and parking along a road


Road, road, road. They do NOT convey anything off-street unless this is brought to motorists' attention while parking on the land.

IMO, appeal.

While waiting, pl post your permit.

Hi @tincombe, you got me thinking about the terms of my permit, but as they are all virtual now, it's not straight forward to find. I did just come across this FAQ page on council website which states you have to park within the bay though. I wonder if this is what they are falling back on? Although, it still doesnt make sense as the contravention is one for a car park.

https://www.walthamforest.gov.uk/parking-roads-and-travel/parking-frequently-asked-questions#:~:text=Where%20can%20I%20park%20with%20my%20residential%20permit?,Permit%20Holders%20Only%2C%20LH'.
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: stamfordman on April 16, 2026, 04:10:20 pm
A case yesterday where the adjudicator was alert to lack of off-street signage.

-------------

Case reference   2250668310
Appellant   Mauricio Soffiati
Authority   London Borough of Tower Hamlets
VRM   FR19YUE
PCN Details
PCN   TT60119828
Contravention date   30 Sep 2025
Contravention time   10:27:30
Contravention location   Ocean North Estate X213
Penalty amount   GBP 160.00
Contravention   Parked in a restricted area in a car park
Referral date   -
Decision Date   15 Apr 2026
Adjudicator   Mackenzie Robinson
Appeal decision   Appeal allowed
Direction   
cancel the Penalty Charge Notice.

Reasons   
Mr Soffiati parked his vehicle on double yellow lines with his blue badge and clock on display. It seems clear that he thought he was parking on a restricted street, using the exemption provided by his blue badge.
The authority contests the appeal on the basis that the area is part of a car park, and the rules of the car park apply even to the double yellow lines. It maintains that display of a blue badge would provide no exemption, because blue badge holders within the car park should park in the designated disabled bays.
I have seen little evidence that this road is part of a car park. I have seen no official plan of the area, or the signage which would normally accompany a car park. The photographs taken by the civil enforcement officer appear to show an ordinary road with double yellow lines combined with no car parking signs in sight.
Assuming that the authority is correct, and this area is part of a car park, the question is whether that was adequately brought to the attention of the driver, so that he ought to have realised the display of his blue badge would provide no exemption from the double yellow lines. Since I have seen no indication of the rules for parking in the area, such as a sign setting out the rules for parking, I do not find that Mr Soffiatt was given adequate information. In those circumstances, no contravention occurred.
This appeal is allowed.
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on April 16, 2026, 11:08:57 am
To be expected however, your reps give you a template for any appeal.

Their reference to 'traffic signs' is total nonsense.

The sign is prescribed under Schedule 4 of these regs: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/introduction

SCHEDULE 4
Upright signs that control waiting, loading and parking along a road


Road, road, road. They do NOT convey anything off-street unless this is brought to motorists' attention while parking on the land.

IMO, appeal.

While waiting, pl post your permit.

Yeah, there are no other signs apart from the on street ones for permit holders. But i think they are saying it's all taken care of through that - which as you point out is rubbish.

I don't have a permit apart from a digital receipt from Ringo who manage the permits. It's active for the area Wood Street North, CPZ zones(70029) - but cant find the terms etc apart from the info @Stamdfordman found earlier in the thread - https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/3864851
I wonder if that helps?
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on April 16, 2026, 11:00:21 am
Images OK for me.

Frankly, whilst the contravention is really trivial, the fact is you are not fully in the bay, and if you take them to London Tribunals you may well not win on the trivial aspect, because adjudicators can only take matters of law into consideration. You have to risk the full PCN penalty if you take them there.

Yeah, i agree. I've got a week or so to consider next steps. I appreciate your input here!
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on April 16, 2026, 10:52:51 am
I think they must mean this one for permit holders on street

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/pw/AP1GczO8vRRJCH4dZClBTGa1TvzDzO52imL6K-aUa6uE9fsglLVQoC08brieVEorK7F66UDsQ9tC9yy883jShbMinIhMTGF195ZBbkhmq3_xX3avUbeNL8lA9SeqXKRIFTWdJ0XRCURYz3TZ6ZCyXqUBMyApVA=w604-h507-s-no-gm?authuser=0)
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tincombe on April 16, 2026, 10:17:08 am
To be expected however, your reps give you a template for any appeal.

Their reference to 'traffic signs' is total nonsense.

The sign is prescribed under Schedule 4 of these regs: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/introduction

SCHEDULE 4
Upright signs that control waiting, loading and parking along a road


Road, road, road. They do NOT convey anything off-street unless this is brought to motorists' attention while parking on the land.

IMO, appeal.

While waiting, pl post your permit.

Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: stamfordman on April 16, 2026, 12:03:59 am
They say signage on site is placed to give effect to conditions of the traffic order.

What signage?
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: Incandescent on April 15, 2026, 11:17:22 pm
Images OK for me.

Frankly, whilst the contravention is really trivial, the fact is you are not fully in the bay, and if you take them to London Tribunals you may well not win on the trivial aspect, because adjudicators can only take matters of law into consideration. You have to risk the full PCN penalty if you take them there.
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on April 15, 2026, 10:37:20 pm
Are the images showing? i'm getting X's here
nevermind working now
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on April 14, 2026, 11:48:43 am
Response from council rejecting my appeal and are pushing back on the off-street parking signage arguement

"With regard to your comments concerning the legal status of signage and enforcement in off-street locations, I can confirm that the restrictions at this site are properly authorised under the relevant Traffic Regulation Order and are enforceable as set out within that Order. The signage on site is placed to give effect to those conditions and is sufficient to convey the restrictions to motorists using the area."

Left with two options, reduced payment £55 or take to Tribunals.
What are your thoughts of tribunal success comrades?

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/pw/AP1GczOs1A0Vp_PuS5vdBsJ4AzoLtJ7mUQkIZ5hUcQxCYXYVb1UbNENHA1wGeFMStTqByGB-j1kwCaIgcDdUYzC_uO630tfZnomCnaDzC0viYU3nNdJDvXuJQCzQsjzSPkop7C6V3Vt-wKRWBuvBmLtQZdL71g=w1030-h1374-s-no-gm?authuser=0)

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/pw/AP1GczMChBrH_I634OgU9po4MhjfYvmCexEVYG9hD5JUT1BFwagnuoSRcYdDw0c55q22bxLnikvZNSUynBT8aqumWMadFgrqndQbPb51tgM0GMWYCxRCPfwEBtq8-oazrQ7m427F4BoTi_DjH7r8jxcKEeGsJw=w986-h1374-s-no-gm?authuser=0)

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/pw/AP1GczMg_IE5vS_AmMsWNNkApcSHdzQ3i4zF8pMoqYNixscr1G4ulxP1o5UYLC_4lDtKFjXQmuoXbai05ezmaespFvPZdKxzbPDET6-bXh5Ma5jUskHnmvsSn-2ySj-AQbIZIEHjw_9i2hotuqUxcKaZ2gRJKg=w984-h1374-s-no-gm?authuser=0)

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/pw/AP1GczNQt5WBqYD1VLrlmOAdg3l89rX9RMgv8UmjuBQwF9GNgxCAx5ddOnkgC4ofYIiCR7jVgmrLiTIZZkmMTxMOXI0RG40u95g5Uy1yQ1Iiv9_ciCP9OXE00MtMUy5C_zknSgzqGPvqzLLO-Vpp2gLdmNbTFA=w1012-h1374-s-no-gm?authuser=0)
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on March 17, 2026, 11:11:40 am
OK i submitted the below challenge. I'll update the response. Thanks again for your help!

*************

PCN FR67606846, Stocksfield Estate

I refer to the above and hereby make formal representations that the contravention did not occur.

I acknowledge the following:
That the markings at the location are clear and that to a minor degree part of my car was parked other than wholly within these markings;

That within the row of parking places the council have erected a 'traffic sign' indicating that parking is restricted to specified permit holders at certain times;

I hold the required permit.

That the contravention and penalty relate only to an 'off-street' contravention.

Other than for the 'traffic sign', there is no information conveyed at or near or at the entrance to the area.

I have also established that:

The authority's traffic order creates restrictions at this location which falls within the 'Stocksfield Estate Off Street Housing Land Areas'.

'Traffic signs' have effect on roads alone and have no effect as regards off-street locations.

From the above it is clear that the authority may not impose penalties in off-street locations on the basis of the regulatory meaning of the 'traffic sign', but must instead convey any restrictions and sanctions using alternative means. The council is or should be well aware of this and therefore I won't belabour the legal precedents. If parking officers are in doubt then I recommend they seek advice from the council's legal officers.

Furthermore, it is unclear what traffic management purpose is served by enforcing this alleged contravention in an end‑of‑row bay occupied by a resident who clearly holds the correct permit.

If the authority rejects these representations, I request that such a decision be accompanied by detailed legal reasoning rather than general assertions or received opinion.
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on March 12, 2026, 10:12:12 am
Well, i'm torn whether to take further as I want to fight them, but never done it personally before. MrMustard represented me last time and won.
I'll challenge this now and expect a refusal then take it from there.

Here's an example of the email:

I refer to the above Penalty Charge Notice and hereby make formal representations that the alleged contravention did not occur.

I acknowledge the following:
That the bay markings at the location are clear and that, to a minor degree, part of my vehicle was parked other than wholly within those markings;

That within the row of parking places the Council has erected a traffic sign indicating that parking is restricted to specified permit holders at certain times; and

That I hold the required permit.

It is also acknowledged that the alleged contravention and penalty relate solely to an off‑street contravention. Other than the aforementioned traffic sign, there is no information conveyed at or near the bay, nor at the entrance to the estate, that would provide adequate notice of any restriction or penalty enforcement.

I have established that the relevant traffic order creates restrictions within the “Stocksfield Estate Off‑Street Housing Land Areas.” Traffic signs, however, have effect on roads only and carry no regulatory meaning in off‑street locations.

Accordingly, the authority may not impose penalties in an off‑street area on the basis of the meaning of a “traffic sign,” but must instead convey any restrictions or sanctions by alternative means expressly authorised for such land. The Council is, or should be, fully aware of this legal position. If further clarification is required, parking officers should seek advice from the Council’s legal department.

Furthermore, it is unclear what traffic management purpose is served by enforcing this alleged contravention in an end‑of‑row bay occupied by a resident who clearly holds the correct permit.

If the authority rejects these representations, I request that such a decision be accompanied by detailed legal reasoning rather than general assertions or received opinion.


Sound ok?
Thanks again!
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tincombe on March 11, 2026, 07:29:27 pm
Sadly, while they're judges in their own cause they're likely to reject. Only an adjudicator would give the law the weight it deserves!

Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on March 11, 2026, 04:56:12 pm
This is a great help, thank you tincomb for putting together response and Stanfordman for the extra sprinkles! I'll put together a response using both.
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: stamfordman on March 10, 2026, 03:22:41 pm
You could also ask them what traffic management purpose is served by enforcing this alleged contravention in an end of row bay by a resident.
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tincombe on March 10, 2026, 11:33:49 am
PCN ******, Stocksfield Estate

I refer to the above and hereby make formal representations that the contravention did not occur.

I acknowledge the following:
That the markings at the location are clear and that to a minor degree part of my car was parked other than wholly within these markings;

That within the row of parking places the council have erected a 'traffic sign' indicating that parking is restricted to specified permit holders at certain times;

I hold the required permit.

That the contravention and penalty relate only to an 'off-street' contravention.

Other than for the 'traffic sign', there is no information conveyed at or near or at the entrance to the area.

I have also established that:

The authority's traffic order creates restrictions at this location which falls within the 'Stocksfield Estate Off Street Housing Land Areas'.

'Traffic signs' have effect on roads alone and have no effect as regards off-street locations.

From the above it is clear that the authority may not impose penalties in off-street locations on the basis of the regulatory meaning of the 'traffic sign', but must instead convey any restrictions and sanctions using alternative means. The council is or should be well aware of this and therefore I won't belabour the legal precedents. If parking officers are in doubt then I recommend they seek advice from the council's legal officers.

If the authority rejects these representations then they must do so with legal argument and, sorry to say, not received wisdom and anecdote.
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on March 10, 2026, 11:03:49 am
Just a quick bump to see if @stamfordman or any others have thoughts on appealing further.
Thanks all in advance again!
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on March 08, 2026, 09:36:37 pm
Thanks John!

Ok all should be showing below.

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/pw/AP1GczP6t8RUADEogeoN4155dD-bmmu-Fc-w2Kq3q3g1RseJ-ISHwWIS9haD4zIy8st3OUVdYB8F_Ib6MwPoXbeUbL5emXqRRt2hbl1n0QvUCUTYTGZevorpA2zrJlAPgcLl0M7-mFPtBZZhcWUlDT4c1wzlCg=w1030-h1374-s-no-gm?authuser=0)

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/pw/AP1GczODccLr6SwV8s1RvoTHPDTok9MIxgrH_zdwEZQlJtjaPKiaxCxjJwAMBt2pu-UqmXUA9yK43tt6sF4Wopcqaa_uqWnt2l4Ri9S8IKccJBFGBbLLhXh245JeAU9RSX-nIdhT0Sk-10P9O9XGd3gtvsX5qA=w1030-h1374-s-no-gm?authuser=0)

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/pw/AP1GczNXS2GytTWnWcslFhe72SW2lAiwpcllIhd0eAfWEJPcO5oHU3RpkF_YABYbA2BE_Gn1kDcugZ_tZYDOBu-xFEEnJianwYPND_KB8oL_oIF33HEP8kkl0dMFlsiCiyO0w-HdMlha3Nw1wxltbBdEm8_dRg=w1030-h1374-s-no-gm?authuser=0)


(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/pw/AP1GczP9aRGFmhQZpW83GSTp4uaKvXiNvaMwmebKBclr5SLW1_Z-vbpHeVTgF3I9xNBwl3rLV-ZSaIL35O_mwAfGwLfjWE_4jOsQv7K8YLqcZpYc-1AcPi_BI3wn8u3M7SclOiq-db9bdg9PV5lsryJvWewr0Q=w1030-h1374-s-no-gm?authuser=0)
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: John U.K. on March 08, 2026, 09:28:28 pm
NTO received. Is it helpful to post it here before considering next steps?

Thanks in advance


Yes. All sides, just redact yr name & addresss - leave all else in.
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on March 08, 2026, 08:48:20 pm
NTO received. Is it helpful to post it here before considering next steps?

Thanks in advance
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on February 27, 2026, 07:23:59 pm
Yes both under my name
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: Incandescent on February 27, 2026, 07:22:39 pm
Still waiting for the NTO to come through. Thanks again for all your help here. I'll update again once i receive it.
The NtO is sent to the name and address on your V5C. Is this up-to-date and the same as when the PCN was served ?
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on February 27, 2026, 01:52:21 pm
Still waiting for the NTO to come through. Thanks again for all your help here. I'll update again once i receive it.
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: stamfordman on February 11, 2026, 05:31:33 pm
There is no traffic management purpose to the PCN too so you can in their statutory duty to act fairly in the public interest.
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on February 11, 2026, 05:04:58 pm
Thanks for getting back,
Yeah, seems they are covered here as my estate is stated at the bottom of that page under off street parking "STOCKSFIELD ESTATE (ACCESS FROM STOCKSFIELD ROAD E17) the whole off-street parking and access areas - except for 94 parking bays"
But yeah, if we think they should be showing this through signage onsite I'm happy to proceed with the challenge. I want to fight them to be honest, this was a ridiculous way to treat residents but i prefer going for it when there some hope for sticking it to them
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: stamfordman on February 11, 2026, 04:54:41 pm
That's an unhelpful reply to say the least.

Actually this is the email address to ask for traffic orders:

traffic.scheme@walthamforest.gov.uk

But this suggests they are solid on parking in bay markings:

https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/3864851

Parking outside or incorrectly within the boundary of a parking bay or parking place would result in a contravention and the issue of a Penalty Charge Notice.

But there is no terms board.

If you're happy to have the full penalty in play I'd wait for the NTO but I expect they'll reoffer the discount if they reject again.
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on February 11, 2026, 04:00:10 pm
Hi Stamfordman/all,

They just curtailed the request. Looks like it's going to next stage
Here's their response:


Dear Mr Evans
Traffic Management Act 2004
Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) Number: FR67606846
Vehicle Registration Number: PY60KGA
Contravention Date and Time: 19/01/2026 at 12:33
Contravention Location: Stocksfield Road Estate E17
PCN Code and Description: 86 Not parked correctly within the markings of a bay or
space
I refer to your correspondence in connection with the Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) as
mentioned above.
When your informal representation was rejected, our letter advised you how to make an
appeal to the independent adjudicator if you wanted to take the matter further. This can only
happen after the registered keeper of the vehicle receives the Notice to Owner (NtO). At that
stage the charge will be at the full amount of £110.00.
You have now written again to the council and I regret that we cannot deal with further
correspondence at this stage. The Traffic Management Act 2004 lays down firm procedures
for processing parking penalties and if you wish to take the matter further you will need to
wait for the NtO which will be sent to you shortly if you are the registered keeper.
New data protection laws apply from 25 May 2018. To find out why the Council needs to
collect and store personal data, how this is used and your rights to access your information,
please refer to our Privacy Policy which can be found on our website at

https://www.walthamforest.gov.uk/council-and-elections/your-data-and-privacy/our-privacy-
notices/parking-services-privacy-notice

Equalities Act 2010 - should you have a disability and require a reasonable adjustment to
complete either making a payment or a challenge against a PCN, please email
parking.services@walthamforest.gov.uk or telephone 0203 092 0112 and select option 6.
Yours sincerely
M Main
On Behalf of Parking Services
London Borough of Waltham Forest
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on January 27, 2026, 09:55:35 pm
Thanks @Standfordman

I'll email back with the below:

To whom it may concern ,

In response to your correspondence and defence raised:

Could you provide me with the off street order for this car park,
Also, can you indicate to me where the terms and conditions notice is in this car park.
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: stamfordman on January 27, 2026, 09:45:55 pm
Yes I guess so.

Ask them for the off street order for the car park, and where the terms and conditions notice in the car park.
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on January 27, 2026, 07:42:28 pm
Via email? I have one to send responses to
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: stamfordman on January 27, 2026, 07:36:41 pm
There's no car park management purpose to enforcing this and there is no off-street car park signage.

Ask them for the off-street order.
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on January 27, 2026, 06:43:10 pm
That was quick - please post up a copy of the rejection.
I know, at 5.45pm too .. working late grinding their grift
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on January 27, 2026, 06:32:38 pm
They rejected the challenge. Didnt even acknowledge the lack of signage for off street terms.
Wonder what your thoughts are regarding taking further?
Thanks in advance

Pics below:

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/pw/AP1GczNow6sP-Z7eXiQnVXesnfFRKQzWM-GM6vxPA2u6yyreTMyzKWAbTEwoIWgwgQEkuTm2yPeb3kHftuSxTd5MIeeq6mAPOUlIrc3AvCIZ0mnKCI_ETzJYhcZo8Kg_a-SKoEUhc_IxVcsRpcfHaxSiXW40NQ=w632-h1370-s-no-gm?authuser=0)

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/pw/AP1GczM2HJbkjE9-ETCIHDui1nWWcfPD3KqWB6EF4MNajfdyTml82UytI86CkLvHqBfbkSoQTtoUiqkTI8kss3i9vXkqJJtB0nhMWuiPdCIMcRv7OP3YPNPMEeI-g31-4dXch0O-VtJui4-klHScYywXuNx5Pw=w632-h1370-s-no-gm?authuser=0)
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: John U.K. on January 27, 2026, 06:31:05 pm
That was quick - please post up a copy of the rejection.
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on January 27, 2026, 06:29:24 pm
1. Contravention did not occur – inadequate signage and unclear terms

Change to:

1. Contravention did not occur – no car park terms and conditions at location

The orders you posted refer to a parent order - I can't find that, but it probably contains the requirement to park in bay markings. If this goes to the tribunal they would have to produce that but in our off-street cases we have long noted that the order itself must be cited at the location along with contraventions that can give rise to penalties as per the order.



They rejected the challenge

Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on January 21, 2026, 09:58:54 am
1. Contravention did not occur – inadequate signage and unclear terms

Change to:

1. Contravention did not occur – no car park terms and conditions at location

The orders you posted refer to a parent order - I can't find that, but it probably contains the requirement to park in bay markings. If this goes to the tribunal they would have to produce that but in our off-street cases we have long noted that the order itself must be cited at the location along with contraventions that can give rise to penalties as per the order.

That's great. thanks so much for this once again. I'll get it submitted now. I cant find that order too, but happy to go further in the challenge if needed.
I'll update thread with their response.
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: stamfordman on January 20, 2026, 11:04:26 pm
1. Contravention did not occur – inadequate signage and unclear terms

Change to:

1. Contravention did not occur – no car park terms and conditions at location

The orders you posted refer to a parent order - I can't find that, but it probably contains the requirement to park in bay markings. If this goes to the tribunal they would have to produce that but in our off-street cases we have long noted that the order itself must be cited at the location along with contraventions that can give rise to penalties as per the order.

Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on January 20, 2026, 09:42:54 pm
So no council car park terms.

Draft a challenge - make two points.

Contravention did not occur. For an off-street contravention the terms of the car park must be displayed including what can be penalised and no such terms are posted at the location.

The alleged contravention is at the end of the bay and parking places used to be set out diagonally. As a resident here for x years I simply made a trivial mistake on autopilot according to the old layout and did not take any space in an adjoining bay.

Thanks so much for your help here @stamfordman. Does this sound ok? Used ai as not my forte

I wish to challenge the above Penalty Charge Notice on the ground that the alleged contravention did not occur.

1. Contravention did not occur – inadequate signage and unclear terms

The alleged contravention is an off-street parking contravention under Code 86: “Not parked correctly within the markings of a bay or space.”

For an off-street car park, the terms and conditions of use — including what constitutes a contravention and what may be enforced by way of a penalty — must be clearly displayed at the location. At this site, there is no signage setting out the parking terms or explaining how bays must be used or what constitutes incorrect parking for the purposes of enforcement.

In the absence of clearly displayed terms and conditions governing the use of parking bays, the authority has not properly conveyed the restriction, and therefore the alleged contravention cannot be said to have occurred.

2. Trivial deviation / de minimis

The allegation relates to parking at the end of a bay. Historically, parking bays at this location were marked diagonally. As a resident of approximately [X] years, I parked out of habit in accordance with the former layout.

Any deviation from the current bay markings was minimal and entirely unintentional. Crucially, my vehicle did not encroach into or prevent the use of any adjoining bay, nor did it cause obstruction or inconvenience. The vehicle was parked wholly within the available parking area.

Given the trivial nature of the deviation, the principle of de minimis applies, and enforcement under Code 86 in these circumstances is disproportionate.

For the reasons above, I respectfully request that the Penalty Charge Notice be cancelled.

Yours faithfully,
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: stamfordman on January 20, 2026, 05:47:57 pm
So no council car park terms.

Draft a challenge - make two points.

Contravention did not occur. For an off-street contravention the terms of the car park must be displayed including what can be penalised and no such terms are posted at the location.

The alleged contravention is at the end of the bay and parking places used to be set out diagonally. As a resident here for x years I simply made a trivial mistake on autopilot according to the old layout and did not take any space in an adjoining bay.


Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E1
Post by: tommytbone on January 20, 2026, 02:20:36 pm
Hopefully the above helps add more local detail
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on January 20, 2026, 02:10:48 pm
There's a sign on the side of the building beside the 'No Flytipping' notice, but it's not possible to read it on Google maps.

Here's images of those signs. They are historic from old parking rules when managed by Ascham Homes, who havent managed the building for 10 years or so.


(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/pw/AP1GczMydAgGKB9_NsZ9NICmSbkPG-2WkyKYaUFL09zYBw2wPQ2TsCYXrp52ETNYZ6Brp7ZWdNqJhZf5tJrhH4QKyH5qAAhF2N1KiFP6fRTEy-z5rsQ3tbmelpwHb3PpRWidQtBWvc4df5hNDmgbdx38EymRsQ=w1028-h1370-s-no-gm?authuser=0)

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/pw/AP1GczO7qCTl64aJ5ivs06zXm8p9jvE8tq2ObRL0eZ1W-EzRQ3th9tgli7pV7i-WbL7-ehK-xcMbqJgio5mYOImAcPmGhjONHi5JUksIyom_Z7LlNciZaRvXjLWGA3bvnwojv0j5RvEmRcf4tmcT4lZclJJZJw=w1028-h1370-s-no-gm?authuser=0)
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on January 20, 2026, 07:02:33 am
Really is. Literally just paid £75 for a parking permit too last week. I also pay an extortionate amount in flat service charges, then come out to your car outside the flat and get greeted with this.
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: Incandescent on January 20, 2026, 12:14:21 am
I have to say its a money-grubbing PCN ! What conceivable traffic management problem is it addressing ? The space to the left of the car is not a bay and can't be.
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on January 19, 2026, 11:49:39 pm
There's a sign on the side of the building beside the 'No Flytipping' notice, but it's not possible to read it on Google maps.

I'll get a picture tomorrow
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on January 19, 2026, 11:47:52 pm
Thanks so much for your input here.
I've found some of the documents from when the area was adopted by the council resident parking scheme.

https://www.walthamforest.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2023-10/T52b%2823%29%20-%20Made%20Traffic%20Orders%20%28TMO%29%20-%20WSN%20extn%20off%20street.pdf

https://www.walthamforest.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2023-10/T52%2823%29%20-%20Notice%20of%20Making%20%28NoM%29%20-%20WSN%20extn.pdf

There's more consultation docs on https://www.walthamforest.gov.uk/parking-roads-and-travel/roads-and-pavements/road-traffic-schemes-closed-consultations
Under section '52b(23) Housing estates:

WSN CPZ extension into off street parking areas off Stocksfield Road, permit holders only (made orders, proposed orders 20 July 2023)"

Sorry if this is too much! Permits are all digital now, so don't have any terms I can find on the Ring-go app
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: catnip on January 19, 2026, 11:42:41 pm
There's a sign on the side of the building beside the 'No Flytipping' notice, but it's not possible to read it on Google maps.
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: stamfordman on January 19, 2026, 11:12:35 pm
What are the terms of your permit. Anything about how and where you need to park?

The road is in a controlled parking zone and usually they wouldn't allow on-street permit holders to park in an off-street estate and vice versa.
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on January 19, 2026, 10:35:02 pm
They've given an off-street contravention which means you were in a car park, and that's confirmed by their on-street traffic order map which shows nothing but a gap there.

But a car park must have a terms board telling you what conditions apply to park there and what penalties there could be, and there doesn't seem to be one.

What's also odd is that the permit parking sign seems to be the same as the one opposite, which is on-street - can you park there too with your permit?

(https://i.ibb.co/bMGm17Cn/Screenshot-2026-01-19-at-22-25-52.png)
(https://i.ibb.co/Gf92QpB9/Screenshot-2026-01-19-at-22-18-43.png)

Interesting. and Yes, the same permit for all streets in the area 'Wood street North' it's called.
The signs are the same yes, no further signs around for this little section
Title: Re: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: stamfordman on January 19, 2026, 10:31:41 pm
They've given an off-street contravention which means you were in a car park, and that's confirmed by their on-street traffic order map which shows nothing but a gap there.

But a car park must have a terms board telling you what conditions apply to park there and what penalties there could be, and there doesn't seem to be one.

What's also odd is that the permit parking sign seems to be the same as the one opposite, which is on-street - can you park there too with your permit?

(https://i.ibb.co/bMGm17Cn/Screenshot-2026-01-19-at-22-25-52.png)
(https://i.ibb.co/Gf92QpB9/Screenshot-2026-01-19-at-22-18-43.png)
Title: Waltham Forest - 86 parked incorrectly within the markings of a bay - Stocksfield Road Estate E17
Post by: tommytbone on January 19, 2026, 09:36:09 pm
Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) Number: FR67606846
Vehicle Registration Number: PY60KGA
86 Not parked correctly within the markings of a bay or space
https://walthamocm.itsvc.co.uk/PCN/

Over zealous enforcement officer got me today. Can a PCN of this sort be challenged? Its the end bay with nothing but empty space after it and one tyre over the bay. I'm following the paving edge, not the white line (see my pic below or pics in the PCN).

A bit of context which make it even more frustrating - Outside our flats we have a rombus shaped area to park. These bays only started being managed by the council 2 years ago, and the white bays you see in the pics were added at this time. Before that, we had no bays and room for 10 cars to park, following the shape of the area and cars parking diagonally filling up the rombus shaped area (i hope that makes sense).
Since the council took over the space (after a consultation with (naive) residents they got the majority) they painted in new white bays perpendicular to top edge - which left 9 spaces and two dead areas on either end.

Basically on the first space i've turned in following my year long muscle memory of following the shape of the paving stone edging not the new white bays and my passenger side rear wheel is over the white line. Never been a problem in last 2 years but this officer got me today.

What do you think? Any other details/advice would be greatly appreciated.

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/pw/AP1GczOAKJShyGXKOttIS7D7h_xg6dvd0sOjLXNkVDr9g9oavVTmazQrLflIaLiV9fPOcAEXnSuijaTVcCKKi0csL3GxIxn0husLOBtgVkraRzyXU3xDW5u083w71UOik9cuMrp5SJt3CaLU99dLIWJM_Ldzcw=w1028-h1370-s-no-gm?authuser=0)

(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/pw/AP1GczOLiO1irqtdxIN3BFAM64jCVXGBr_AMq7YVBbecp4w5Ea_IBT8B-U7SEqAVrNZ94Q_GpPb9Z882LKZuH6NWuw56ETBCyNEUtdEhBcsKYwkcZ4Ix_ibooIfLosXK25H3xCrq4BV9V_OOOzf-9LWb-Bn7lg=w1028-h1370-s-no-gm?authuser=0)

Here's the streetview of the first parking bay I used: https://maps.app.goo.gl/GfaZ3PRSbkJVoJck9