Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: fahim128 on February 20, 2026, 10:33:02 am
-
Really could use any help!
OK, fine, but the regulars on here are all volunteers and give their time freely.
If nobody posts and you're getting near the deadline, just submit it. It reads well enough, but it will be rejected whatever its content. Thats how councils ruthlessly game the system - refuse reps, re-offer discount, and watch the money flow in. Most people, (like about 95%) just cough-up being scared of the adjudicators, and also the doubling of their financial risk. Cash from PCN penalties even with most paid at the discounted rate net London councils and TfL over £600 million a year; a Nice Little Earner.
99% actually and less than 1% fight.
-
So I already submitted the letter that I posted 2 days ago - what should I do now? Also, it’s the 6th June now so I’ve passed the 4th June deadline anyway?
That's fine which is why it is showing £160 in that case. But I advise putting mine in as a supplementary and/or retracting the other one.
Been busy with big fish and heat sorry. Like a Pre action protocol letter to RBK.
https://www.ftla.uk/news-press-articles/that-kingston-box-junction/msg120975/#msg120975
I have sent you a PM and seriously suggest you let me personally take care of this for you.
2250205130 They failed to attend which they MUST.
At this scheduled personal hearing the Appellant was represented by Mr Morgan, who appeared in person via MS Teams.
The Enforcement Authority did not attend and was not represented, either in vision, by telephone, or in person.
....................
I note that the Enforcement Authority has produced a witness statement from its authorised officer but Paragraph 7(6) of Schedule 1 to the 1996 Act provides that nothing in sub-paragraph (1) or (4) [Admissibility of certain evidence] above makes a document admissible as evidence in proceedings under paragraph 6 above unless a copy of it has not less than 7 days before the hearing, been served on the appellant; and nothing in those paragraphs makes a document admissible as evidence of anything other than the matters shown on a record produced by a prescribed device if that person, not less than three days before the hearing or within such further time as the traffic adjudicator may in special circumstances allow, serves a notice on the council requiring attendance at the hearing or trial of the person who signed the document.
The Appellant’s representative served notice within the prescribed time for the attendance of the named officer, but they have not attended.
Therefore, I cannot find as facet that on this occasion a contravention did occur.
Accordingly, this appeal must be allowed.
-
Really could use any help!
OK, fine, but the regulars on here are all volunteers and give their time freely.
If nobody posts and you're getting near the deadline, just submit it. It reads well enough, but it will be rejected whatever its content. Thats how councils ruthlessly game the system - refuse reps, re-offer discount, and watch the money flow in. Most people, (like about 95%) just cough-up being scared of the adjudicators, and also the doubling of their financial risk. Cash from PCN penalties even with most paid at the discounted rate net London councils and TfL over £600 million a year; a Nice Little Earner.
-
So I already submitted the letter that I posted 2 days ago - what should I do now? Also, it’s the 6th June now so I’ve passed the 4th June deadline anyway?
-
Hold fire.
Forget all that.
I refer to my informal challenge and require you to consider it again as formal representations against the Enforcement Notice save for one amendment which I itemise as 1. below.
1. For the avoidance of doubt, there is no evidence of the sign to diagram 958 allegedly passed in the video.
2. The alleged incursion did not occur and the sign to diagram 959 is not placed where it should be i.e. at the start of the solid white line.
In light of the above, I request cancellation of the PCN and EN.
If you want my assistance, please follow my advice to the letter. PM sent. DEADLINE WAS 4TH JUNE.
Just checked website still shows £160. Do it now.
VA17SJO
Remaining Balance
£160.00
* Mandatory Field
Payment For
Penalty Charge Notice
PCN Number
TT61001743
Amount * £160.00
-
Really could use any help!
-
Hi guys
I ended up deciding to fight it anyway and escalate it to tribunal, don't have anything to lose if i fight it anyway.
Here's my representation letter, im expecting them to reject it and me having to escalate it, so i'd appreciate some support in formulating a proper argument. Any advice will be much appreciated!
3 June 2026
Highways, Transportation and Parking Services
London Borough of Tower Hamlets
PO Box 14790
London
E14 2WA
FORMAL REPRESENTATIONS AGAINST PENALTY CHARGE NOTICE
PCN Number: TT61001743 | Vehicle: VA17SJO | Date of Contravention: 07/02/2026
Dear Sir or Madam,
I write to make formal representations against the above Penalty Charge Notice, issued in respect of vehicle VA17SJO for the alleged contravention of ‘being in a bus lane’ on Cambridge Heath Road on 7 February 2026. I am the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle.
I submit these representations on two grounds, both of which I respectfully contend are sufficient, individually and cumulatively, to warrant cancellation of the PCN.
GROUND 1: INADEQUATE SIGNAGE — INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO ESTABLISH CONTRAVENTION
The enforcement footage and still images submitted in support of this PCN do not clearly show a sign to diagram 959 (as required under the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016) in a manner sufficient to confirm that the bus lane restriction was properly authorised and signed at the point of alleged contravention.
In the enforcement footage, a blue sign is partially visible to the rear of the scene. However, it is substantially obscured by tree vegetation such that its content cannot be read or confirmed. It is therefore not possible to establish from the footage alone that:
1. the sign conforms to diagram 959 of the TSRGD 2016;
2. the sign was of the prescribed size, in good condition, and unobstructed at the time of the alleged contravention; or
3. the sign clearly indicated the operational hours and classes of vehicle to which the restriction applied.
The burden of proof in PCN proceedings rests with the issuing authority, not the motorist. Where the evidence submitted does not clearly establish that the restriction was properly signed in accordance with the relevant legislation, the Penalty Charge Notice cannot be sustained. I submit that this is precisely such a case.
I note that the council has not provided any supplementary evidence to address this deficiency — for example, a ground-level photograph of the sign taken at or near the date of the alleged contravention, a signing schedule, or a copy of the Traffic Regulation Order confirming authorised signage for this location. In the absence of such evidence, the footage alone is insufficient to discharge the council’s burden.
I formally request that the council provides the following documents in connection with these representations:
4. A copy of the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) in force for this bus lane on Cambridge Heath Road at the date of the alleged contravention;
5. A ground-level photograph of the diagram 959 sign at or near this location, taken at a date reasonably proximate to 7 February 2026; and
6. Confirmation that the sign was compliant with TSRGD 2016 requirements (size, placement, condition, and visibility) at the time of the alleged contravention.
GROUND 2: MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES — BRIEF, INADVERTENT, AND IMMEDIATELY CORRECTED INCURSION
Without prejudice to Ground 1, and in the event that the council considers the signage to be adequate, I respectfully draw attention to the following mitigating circumstances.
Having reviewed the enforcement footage, my vehicle was present within the bus lane for no more than approximately 7–10 metres, and was not at any point wholly within it. Upon becoming aware that I had inadvertently drifted into the bus lane, I took immediate steps to return to the traffic lane, having first checked for vehicles to my right as safety required. The incursion was momentary, minor, and self-corrected without delay.
I submit that the imposition of a full Penalty Charge Notice in these circumstances is disproportionate and that this case properly falls within the category of minor and inadvertent contraventions where the exercise of discretion in the motorist’s favour is warranted.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons set out above, I respectfully request that this Penalty Charge Notice be cancelled in full. In particular:
7. The enforcement footage does not clearly show adequate signage compliant with TSRGD 2016, and the council has not supplemented this with any ground-level or TRO evidence. The burden of proof has not been met.
8. Even if the signage were considered adequate, the nature of the contravention — a brief, partial, and immediately corrected incursion — renders the full penalty disproportionate in the circumstances.
Should the council reject these representations, I wish to be notified accordingly so that I may exercise my right of appeal to the independent Traffic Penalty Tribunal.
Yours faithfully,
-
Really desperate now - sorry guys but is there any help you can give? If not I guess I’ll have to just pay the fine but I
-
Hi Hippocrates, have you had a chance to think about this please. I really need to give a response in the morning
-
Hi, any thoughts please? I need to submit by 3rd! Again, really sorry to be a pain!
-
Thank you!
-
I will do it soon!
-
Thank you for your help Hippocrates! I think there's a few days left until the 28 days for representation is up (notice is 6th May so I've got until 3rd June!)
-
Sorry heat-impacted. Back later.
-
Thanks Hippocrates! Look forward to your response
-
I’m assuming the risky part you mention is the £160?
Tbh I don’t mind risking it on principle because I think it’s unfair!
-
I will deal with this personally tomorrow.
-
Hi all
any thoughts on fighting this please - i've received my enforcement notice after they rejected my initial appeal but it's ridiculous because the time stamps on the photos literally show i was in the bus lane for around 1 second!
Could really use your expertise!
Thanks in advance (and thanks everyone who's already contributed!)
Forget the time stamps on the photos they are frames from the video.If you look at the video and take the time of entry into the bus lane to the end of the video, you'll see it is many more seconds. The video ends before you leave the bus lane, so total time is likely to be longer.
Your best option apart from paying the discount, is to follow the process to London Tribunals with help from Hippocrates who has won many bus lane appeals. The downside is you have to risk the full PCN penalty
-
Hi all
any thoughts on fighting this please - i've received my enforcement notice after they rejected my initial appeal but it's ridiculous because the time stamps on the photos literally show i was in the bus lane for around 1 second!
Could really use your expertise!
Thanks in advance (and thanks everyone who's already contributed!)
-
Ta. I will think it over and advise tomorrow.
Hi, sorry to be a pain, any support on this would be much appreciated!
-
Ta. I will think it over and advise tomorrow.
-
Here is the appeal that I sent that was rejected:
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to formally appeal against Penalty Charge Notice TT61001743, issued in respect
of vehicle VA17 SJO, for the alleged contravention of ‘being in a bus lane’ on Cambridge
Heath Road on 7/2/26.
I respectfully submit this appeal on the following grounds:
1. DE MINIMIS
Having reviewed the council’s own enforcement video, it is evident that my vehicle was
present within the bus lane for no more than approximately 7–10 metres, and at no point fully
within it. Upon realising I had inadvertently drifted into the bus lane, I moved back into the
traffic lane as promptly as was safely practicable, having first checked for vehicles to my
right.
The intrusion was momentary, minor, and immediately self-corrected. I submit that such a
brief and negligible incursion should properly be regarded as de minimis, and that issuing a
full Penalty Charge Notice in these circumstances is disproportionate and unreasonable.
2. INADEQUATE SIGNAGE / INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE OF CONTRAVENTION
I further draw the council’s attention to the fact that the enforcement video submitted in
support of this PCN does not clearly show a sign to diagram 959 in a manner sufficient to
establish that the contravention occurred. The standard of proof required to sustain a Penalty
Charge Notice has therefore not been met.
For the above reasons, I respectfully request that this Penalty Charge Notice be cancelled in
full.
-
What did you say in the first challenge?
Dear TH
Your video shows a sign to diagram 959 which is obscured. It does not show any sign to diagram 958 allegedly passed.. Therefore, the standard of proof of the alleged contravention is not satisfactory. Please cancel the PCN.
-
Hi guys, any help would be much appreciated, i need to let them know soon what I plan to do! Thanks in advance!
-
Hi all, I've received the Enforcement notice ( here https://imgpile.com/p/TLrtS91 ) - please advise on how to proceed! Thanks in advance again!
-
The Enforcement Notice will give details of grounds.
-
Amazing great thank you so much! I notice that they haven't told me how to appeal - will that come with the enforcement notice you mention?
-
https://imgpile.com/p/pWGBps3
How original!
Wait for the Enforcement Notice and I will take care of this for you. Sorry I made a typo : 959 twice in the draft. No matter. I have won all my bus lane cases for the last 4 years or so and TH are one of them as they did not show up at the hearing which they MUST.
-
Well, if you're outside the discount period allowed, it is now a no-brainer to register an appeal with London Tribnals, because the penalty remains the same, and there are no additional costs at all. If you lose, you pay the full PCN penalty, and if you win, you pay nothing. The council, however have the PITA of preparing an evidence pack and must also pay the adjudication fee. So even if they win, they never get the full amount.
-
Hi guys
I've had a response from the council regarding my appeal (which they sent on 1st Apr, which I annoyingly missed in my inbox as I had a backlog I just worked through! - that means I lost my 14 day reduced period :/ )
Here is the response from the council, they rejected it
https://imgpile.com/p/pWGBps3
If you have any suggestions or advise, it would be much appreciated.
Thanks
-
Submitted! I'll keep you guys informed! Thanks
-
Good rather than bad
-
Looks OK to me. If nobody else suggests alterations, ram it in ! Don't expect them to roll-over and cancel, though.
Will it have a good chance of winning though, that’s the main thing!
-
My golden rule: do not admit to anything and let them prove their case. Have I not represented you before?
I don’t believe so! Not at at a tribunal or anything, although I have had advice from here in the past, if that’s what you mean!
-
My golden rule: do not admit to anything and let them prove their case. Have I not represented you before?
-
Looks OK to me. If nobody else suggests alterations, ram it in ! Don't expect them to roll-over and cancel, though.
-
I would mention the de minimis intrusion into the bus lane. If you get to London Tribunals, one always fires all one's ammunition.
How’s this for a draft (thank you AI!), please let me know what you guys think!
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to formally appeal against Penalty Charge Notice [PCN NUMBER], issued in respect of vehicle [REGISTRATION], for the alleged contravention of ‘being in a bus lane’ on Cambridge Heath Road on [DATE].
I respectfully submit this appeal on the following grounds:
1. DE MINIMIS
Having reviewed the council’s own enforcement video, it is evident that my vehicle was present within the bus lane for no more than approximately 7–10 metres, and at no point fully within it. Upon realising I had inadvertently drifted into the bus lane, I moved back into the traffic lane as promptly as was safely practicable, having first checked for vehicles to my right.
The intrusion was momentary, minor, and immediately self-corrected. I submit that such a brief and negligible incursion should properly be regarded as de minimis, and that issuing a full Penalty Charge Notice in these circumstances is disproportionate and unreasonable.
2. INADEQUATE SIGNAGE / INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE OF CONTRAVENTION
I further draw the council’s attention to the fact that the enforcement video submitted in support of this PCN does not clearly show a sign to diagram 959 in a manner sufficient to establish that the contravention occurred. The standard of proof required to sustain a Penalty Charge Notice has therefore not been met.
For the above reasons, I respectfully request that this Penalty Charge Notice be cancelled in full.
Yours faithfully,
-
I would mention the de minimis intrusion into the bus lane. If you get to London Tribunals, one always fires all one's ammunition.
-
Hi guys, thanks for the advice that’s already been given, I really do appreciate it. But just need a bit of clarity please:
Should I be appealing based on the de minimis of only being in it for a tiny amount of time and distance, or because the signage isn’t clear, or should I incorporate both?
I’m not great at this kind of stuff so I do apologise in advance!
-
Dear TH
Your video shows a sign to diagram 959 which is obscured. It does not show any sign to diagram 959. Therefore, the standard of proof of the alleged contravention is not satisfactory. Please cancel the PCN.
********
Check their website grounds too and put the above into a pdf.
Thanks for the draft. There’s no mention of the amount of time and distance that I was in it, so should I not mention that as well? Also, the signage is pretty clear in real life, in case that makes a difference!
-
Dear TH
Your video shows a sign to diagram 959 which is obscured. It does not show any sign to diagram 959. Therefore, the standard of proof of the alleged contravention is not satisfactory. Please cancel the PCN.
********
Check their website grounds too and put the above into a pdf.
-
Looking at the video, I reckon you were in it for about 7-10 metres, and then never fully. The bus lane starts where the wide white line starts, not the dashed line before it, so your case is definitely one of de minimisplus anything Hippocrates suggests re the enforcement process and their errors with the PCN.
-
Video deleted. Is there upright signage visible? Do not admit to anything.
apologies, i dont know how this got deleted. here's the video
the signage is visible tbh
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/pgcqyx1azd8h0ug9genoj/WhatsApp-Video-2026-02-19-at-08.44.08.mp4?rlkey=4luv7z5nm587iz0sgrb5nlb8z&dl=0
-
Video deleted. Is there upright signage visible? Do not admit to anything.
-
Understood. Would you recommend a specific template?
There are no templates, and for an adjudicator, (assuming you take them to London Tribunals), your own words are best, reviewed by us before you submit them.
-
Understood. Would you recommend a specific template?
-
I was driving all the way along that street. How would you suggest I appeal? If you have any templates or anything, it would be much appreciated!
You need to major on the fact that you realised you were entering a bus lane, so moved as soon as was prudent, bearing in mind the neeed to check for traffic to your right), into the traffic lane. The distance covered in the bus lane was so short at around 10 metres as to surely be considered de minimis.
-
I was driving all the way along that street. How would you suggest I appeal? If you have any templates or anything, it would be much appreciated!
-
You can see the venal greed and rapacity of London councils with this case. I would take them all the way on this one. The basis of your appeal would be the offence did not occur for reason de minimis. Were you driving all the way along that street, or did you turn left onto it just before the bus lane ?
-
Hi all
LOCATION ON GOOGLE MAPS: https://maps.app.goo.gl/QxViSG581oBhd6kv5
VIDEO FROM TOWER HAMLETS: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/z9259j35unqw7u32qgbyq/VIDEO-2026-02-19-08-44-05.mp4?rlkey=4kqxxulpxzkwbjfrhi2axvoqt&st=q0c84778&dl=0
IMAGES FROM TOWER HAMLETS (including the PCN): https://imgpile.com/p/UjMumiN
I'd really appreciate any support on whether I can appeal this. I got sent this PCN from Tower Hamlets Council for driving on a bus lane. It is evident from the video and images (see links below) that I tried to correct it within a few milliseconds of me realising i was driving during prohibited times, so the contravention is literally at the beginning of the bus lane. The video backs this up.
Any support will be appreciated!
(https://imgpile.com/p/UjMumiN#EsDIu2Q)