Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: Tod on January 21, 2026, 12:01:11 pm
-
@Hippocrates Westminster have now rejected my representations and maintain that the PCN is compliant. Would you recommend proceeding to London Tribunals on the compliance point?
-
They deny the PCN is non-compliant, and emphasise tht the contravention is made out, so to get a decision either way, you have to now register an appeal at London Tribunals. It's this or pay the discount.
-
Hi all,
A few days ago I received a notice of rejection from Westminster Parking Services regarding my recent appeal. I’m sharing it here to get some guidance on what to do next.
https://ibb.co/dsqptxyK
https://ibb.co/7x2zj7F3
-
Thanks, understood.
I’ll take my own screenshot and keep it for later.
-
https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/ajAqgYU_xl.png
Save this for later and take your own.
Dear Westminster
A motorist is entitled to know when and what to pay. There is a clear disconnect between your website and the law. Furthermore, the PCN fails to include mandatory information concerning the increase of the price 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;
It then goes on to conflate and misstate which action triggers the issue of a charge certificate.
Therefore, please cancel the PCN.
-
This law is an ass. Back later.
-
Understood — I’m focusing on the 28-day period linked to the issue of a charge certificate.
The PCN refers to both “28 days beginning with the date of this notice” and later “28 days beginning with the date of service”, which appears inconsistent.
I’d welcome Hippocrates’ view on whether that ambiguity is sufficient to render the PCN non-compliant.
-
There's plenty of references to various 28 day periods. The relevant one is the one linked to when they may increase the penalty charge to £240.
It would be good to get Hippocrates' input to check he agrees this is enough to get the PCN overturned as he is the true expert on PCN compliance.
-
Fair point — my earlier comment was based on the payment wording. On re-reading, the PCN later refers to “28 days beginning with the date of service”, which appears inconsistent. That’s the issue I’m now looking at.
-
It clearly doesn't.
Reread the final sentence under the section "2 Challenge the PCN"
-
Thanks for that — I’ve checked the PCN and it does state “28 days beginning with the date of this notice”, so it looks compliant on that point. Happy to hear if there are any other angles worth exploring.
-
I think there may be a flaw in the wording of the PCN.
The law requires the PCN to state (amongst other things):
"(iii)that the penalty charge must be paid before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of the notice;
(iv)that if the penalty charge is paid before the end of the period of 14 days beginning with the date of the notice, the amount of the penalty charge will be reduced by the specified proportion;
(v)that, if the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the 28 day period, an increased charge may be payable;"
Clearly, in that context, the 28 date period in part (v) is 28 days beginning with the date of the notice.
Your PCN states "If the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of service of the Notice, an increased charge of £240.00 (less money paid) may be payable".
Date of service is different to the date of the notice (presumed to be 2 business days different by law). As such the PCN does not comply with the legal requirements and ought to be unenforceable.
@Hippocrates is the go to member when it comes to technical deficiencies - see what he thinks.
-
Hi, thanks for your reply.
Here is the exact location link to the junction so you can check it on GSV:
📍 https://maps.app.goo.gl/BTvM4w87vm5aVnuE6
-
Your understanding is wrong, unfortunately. The only time you can stop in a YBJ is if you enter to turn right, and cannot complete the turn because of oncoming traffic.
Their video shows a clear contravention, but the camera is 'on-high'. Please post a GSV link to the exact location. You have an appeal argument if buildings prevent you from seeing to the left of the YBJ.
-
Hi all,
I’ve received a PCN for Contravention 31J (box junction) at Piccadilly / Berkeley Street. I was turning left in heavy traffic. My understanding up to now has always been that when turning left or right, it’s acceptable to pause briefly in a box junction if traffic ahead slows, as long as you’re not blocking cross traffic.
In this case, I entered the box while turning left, traffic then didn’t move and I was stopped for about 7 seconds, with part of my car in the box because there was nowhere else to stop. The CCTV shows I was turning and didn’t obstruct other vehicles.
I’m now learning that enforcement may be stricter than I thought, so I’d appreciate any advice on whether my understanding was wrong and whether there are any realistic grounds to challenge, or if paying at the discount is the sensible option.
@Hippocrates
Thanks in advance.
Tod
https://ibb.co/twYX6Wjw