Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: GirlFriday on February 20, 2026, 10:05:27 pm
-
Remove reference to advance warning of the box junction, because these "Devices of the Devil" require no signs at all.
Very true - I will take that bit out, thank you for highlighting.
The rest is OK?
EDIT: just recalculated - letter dated 28/04/26 states to appeal within 28 days from day of service, so that would mean deadline is Wednesday and not today... in which case - i'll do it tomorra (Tuesday)! (google says day of service is 2days from date on letter - hope that's right!)
-
Remove reference to advance warning of the box junction, because these "Devices of the Devil" require no signs at all.
-
28 days appeal deadline so must get this out today! ( received 28.04.2026)
As it's a Bank Holiday I won't be able to run this down to the P.0 (and obtain proof of postage) so will submit it online for him. Please can someone just cast an eye over this - and let me know if it's sufficient?
The place where the alleged contravention happened is approx 30miles away so will ask him to (if poss) drive up on a rainy evening to take photos before the hearing date.
____________________________________________
I respectfully submit this appeal against the Penalty Charge Notice issued by the London Borough of Brent in relation to the alleged yellow box junction contravention at Salisbury Avenue / Hartland Road.
At the time of the alleged contravention I was unfamiliar with the area, as I do not live locally and had not previously driven through this junction.
The incident occurred during darkness and in heavy rain. Although street lighting was present, the weather conditions significantly reduced visibility of the carriageway markings. The yellow box junction markings were not sufficiently visible to me on approach and I genuinely did not see the full extent of the box before entering it. Had I seen the markings clearly, I would have exercised greater caution and waited before proceeding.
I also did not observe any illuminated advance warning signage drawing attention to the box junction. In conditions of darkness and heavy rainfall, reliance is placed primarily on the visibility of the road markings themselves. Due to the wet road surface, glare from headlights and reflections from street lighting, the box markings were difficult to distinguish.
This can also be seen from the CCTV footage provided by Brent Council, which shows the heavy rain, darkness, reflections from lighting, and the generally poor visibility conditions at the time of the alleged contravention.
In fact, when reviewing the council’s own evidence photographs, I personally had to look carefully and double check to distinguish that a yellow box junction was even present, as the markings are extremely difficult to see in the images provided. This further demonstrates the reduced visibility conditions that existed at the time.
I submit that these conditions materially affected my ability to identify the junction markings in sufficient time to safely assess whether my exit was clear. This was not deliberate misuse of the junction or an attempt to gain advantage in traffic. I was driving cautiously in poor weather conditions in an unfamiliar area.
I would also respectfully ask the Adjudicator to consider previous tribunal decisions where visibility and road conditions were found relevant to the enforceability of yellow box junction markings. Adjudicators have accepted that darkness, rain, worn markings, and reduced visibility may impair a driver’s ability to properly identify a box junction and judge the available exit space.
In the circumstances, I respectfully request that the appeal be allowed and that the Penalty Charge Notice be cancelled.
___________________________________________________
Should I add the below in (for good measure?) I found this looking back on this helpful forum:
Also, the wording of the PCN incites confusion and fails to clearly convey the mandatory information required under Paragraph 4(8)(v) of the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003, namely that if the penalty charge is not paid before the end of the relevant 28-day period, an increased charge may become payable.
The legislation distinguishes between two separate time periods:
1. Payment of the penalty charge, which must be made within 28 days beginning with the date of the notice; and
2. The submission of representations, which are calculated from the date of service of the notice (deemed to be two working days after the date of the notice).
However, the PCN states:
“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.”
This wording is unclear because it conflates the two separate statutory periods into one. The use of the word “or” combines payment and representations, despite the fact that each is governed by a different starting date under the legislation.
As a result, the PCN creates confusion as to the correct deadline for payment. A motorist reading the notice could reasonably conclude that payment is also calculated from the date of service, when the legislation states that payment runs from the date of the notice itself.
Further confusion arises because the PCN omits the mandatory statutory wording relating specifically to payment before the end of the 28-day period beginning with the date of the notice.
Accordingly, the PCN fails to clearly and accurately communicate the recipient’s legal obligations and time limits, rendering it non-compliant with the requirements of the 2003 Act.
________________________________________
Any help appreciated - don't want to mess this up!
Please let me know if I should add/ omit/ amend anything?
Thanks a lot
-
Your photos show a clear YBJ in the dry. You need a rainy night before an adjudication so you can get a representative picture. If you register an appeal now, it is likely to be some weeks before you get a hearing date. Always opt for a hearing, and NEVER a decision just on the papers.
Hearings are by phone or video, (MS Teams, I think). The councils almost never attend.
-
I think the visibility of the box is your strongest argument. Looking at the evidence photo on your PCN, if you didn't already know the box was there, you'd never realise there was a box junction in the picture.
A video taken in similar conditions from a driver's point of view would be super helpful, but difficult to achieve in practice at this time of year.
You might want to consider having a go at night even if it isn't raining as that might also help if it shows the markings are faded - the adjudicator can apply his/her own judgement to extrapolate to how these might look in the rain.
Pictures posted as received ^.
What are thoughts on the junction box? The yellow lines are definitely are not solid opaque, mind. Nope, he's not from the area at all so didn't have a berties about the yellow box being there.
Would like to know what the you guys think? Am hoping to do the appeal form and post out on the Friday (deadline is Monday). Tia.
-
Nightime View
(https://i.ibb.co/ymYDbpTQ/IMG-20260220-WA0049.jpg) (https://ibb.co/ymYDbpTQ) (https://i.ibb.co/5hM4CP9m/IMG-20260220-WA0047.jpg) (https://ibb.co/5hM4CP9m) (https://i.ibb.co/DP5zWb8j/IMG-20260220-WA0044.jpg) (https://ibb.co/DP5zWb8j) (https://i.ibb.co/JWqj5kQT/IMG-20260220-WA0042.jpg) (https://ibb.co/JWqj5kQT)
(https://i.ibb.co/xT4gDTk/IMG-20260220-WA0037.jpg) (https://ibb.co/xT4gDTk)
Daytime View (not very bright - struggle to spot it in a couple of photo's
(https://i.ibb.co/bMmwKZdJ/IMG-20260520-WA0010.jpg) (https://ibb.co/bMmwKZdJ) (https://i.ibb.co/tTBsNd0Y/IMG-20260520-WA0011.jpg) (https://ibb.co/tTBsNd0Y) (https://i.ibb.co/RkWdSGcg/IMG-20260520-WA0012.jpg) (https://ibb.co/RkWdSGcg) (https://i.ibb.co/DxCcjg0/IMG-20260520-WA0014.jpg) (https://ibb.co/DxCcjg0)
-
I think the visibility of the box is your strongest argument. Looking at the evidence photo on your PCN, if you didn't already know the box was there, you'd never realise there was a box junction in the picture.
A video taken in similar conditions from a driver's point of view would be super helpful, but difficult to achieve in practice at this time of year.
You might want to consider having a go at night even if it isn't raining as that might also help if it shows the markings are faded - the adjudicator can apply his/her own judgement to extrapolate to how these might look in the rain.
-
No discount on offer means its a total no-brainer to take them to London Tribunals.
Good luck and hope you win.
-
Video shows that the YBJ markings are not all that worn.On the other hand, its taken from height, and doesn't show what a driver would see. Basically, they only want the money to will take it to the wire to get it. The only place you'd get an unbiased opinion is London Tribunals with the full PCN penalty in play. If you decide to go down that route, and want to present the best possible case, you'd really need to go to the location when it's pouring with rain and take photos or a video to show the visibility of the YBJ as evidence in your appeal.
The full penalty is at play already so I guess its all or nothing now - only issue is the deadline is this weekend and the weather in London (bizarrely!) is showing as full on sunshine! (when ever has a bank holiday week NOT been a washout?!) I know there were some more photo's taken when he next went to the area and I've just left a message asking them to be forwarded on to me. Fingers crossed they were taken whilst rainy weather..
Will post on here as soon as I get them. There are a few close ups taken of the yellow box in the first post.
@JimmyM posted this about the wording of the pcn/ box size (post no.9) if that'd carry any weight?
-
Video shows that the YBJ markings are not all that worn.On the other hand, its taken from height, and doesn't show what a driver would see. Basically, they only want the money to will take it to the wire to get it. The only place you'd get an unbiased opinion is London Tribunals with the full PCN penalty in play. If you decide to go down that route, and want to present the best possible case, you'd really need to go to the location when it's pouring with rain and take photos or a video to show the visibility of the YBJ as evidence in your appeal.
-
Nowhere in this thread have I seen any reference to the video, which is their sole evidence. Has the video been viewed at all ? It's normally viewable on their website by quoting PCN Number and car reg.
Always remember that the contravention is entering the box and having to stop due to the presence of stationary vehicles. Does the video show this ?
Ahhhhhh...yes, the video does show the car entering the box and stopping when another car was in there already. However, the junction box was not visible due to the poor weather conditions as it was daek and raining, can just about make it out on the VIDEO HERE. (https://limewire.com/d/nv9fO#2hbS9rD84W) No traffic was obstructed of that helps (probably doesn't!) Feel like im clutching at straps now(!)
-
Nowhere in this thread have I seen any reference to the video, which is their sole evidence. Has the video been viewed at all ? It's normally viewable on their website by quoting PCN Number and car reg.
Always remember that the contravention is entering the box and having to stop due to the presence of stationary vehicles. Does the video show this ?
-
So the 14 days to cough up the discounted rate have passed..
I'd like to start writing the appeal where I give reasons, citing:
* Poor weather conditions and visibility.
* Brent didn't even acknowledge my views re. visibility in the NoR
* I've just found on here THIS POST no.9 (https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/london-borough-of-brent-31-yellow-box-junction-salusbury-rd-jw-hartland-rd-nw6/)talking about the yellow box spec (chuck this in too to make the case stronger?!) its Post no.9 (talking about box size and wording
* Box size issue highlighted HERE see Post no.12 (https://www.ftla.uk/index.php?action=profile;u=262;area=showposts;start=0)
Is this valid enough for tribunal?
Any advice gratefully received, much appreciated.
-
So sorry for the confusion earlier; I should have been clearer. The “owner” and the “driver” are the same person in this case , as he is the registered keeper and was driving his own vehicle at the time of the alleged contravention.
I’m not directly involved in the situation.. just helping the fella out.
-
This would appear to be the current Practice Direction: https://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/sites/default/files/Practice%20Direction%2003-2024%20on%20behalf%20of%20ETA%2028%20November%202024%20%28PWS%29.pdf
Paras 10 and 11 would seem to apply:
Re-service of Notice of Rejection after a Ground 2 [made reps but did not receive a NOR] Declaration
10. The Authority may re-serve the Notice of Rejection on the Declarant and allow a further 28
days to appeal. To comply with the Regulations, the Authority is required to refer the
declaration to the Adjudicator under these circumstances, even though no action is required
of the Adjudicator.
11. Where the Authority has re-served a Notice of Rejection after a Ground 2 Declaration in line
with the process described in the paragraph above, and the Declarant appeals against the re-
served Notice of Rejection, the Authority should ensure that the case summary indicates
that there had been re-service. The date of the re-service must be indicated in the
verification code and the Notice of Appeal form to enable the Proper Officer to ascertain
whether the appeals are made in time.
OP, pl clarify who's who here because earlier you wrote: and Brent have since sent correspondence to the driver and it contains a copy of the NoR.
The driver has nothing to do with this process: it is owner liability i.e. the registered keeper.
So pl clarify who's who.
-
It would help if we could read what you've described as "Reissue of letter" because the link you have labelled "FRONT" doesn't work.
It might explain where you are getting new deadline dates from, which, incidentally, you got wrong for the original PCN so best we see the new letter.
@ Incandescent.
They appear to be following the standing 'directions', issued by the tribunal in 2016.
Correct LINK HERE for the first 'front' page (https://ibb.co/8n8RV9xV)of the reissue letter that I messed up earlier (unable to edit the post above). Thanks for highlighting my error.
First page of the Reissue of Letter (https://ibb.co/8n8RV9xV)
-
It would help if we could read what you've described as "Reissue of letter" because the link you have labelled "FRONT" doesn't work.
It might explain where you are getting new deadline dates from, which, incidentally, you got wrong for the original PCN so best we see the new letter.
@ Incandescent.
They appear to be following the standing 'directions', issued by the tribunal in 2016.
Ah, right. So the OP now has the rejection letter and can now decide whether to pay-up, or register a case at London Tribunals.
Yep, that's correct.
Oh gosh, I'll edit the post with the correct hyperlink to show the first page now.
-
It would help if we could read what you've described as "Reissue of letter" because the link you have labelled "FRONT" doesn't work.
It might explain where you are getting new deadline dates from, which, incidentally, you got wrong for the original PCN so best we see the new letter.
@ Incandescent.
They appear to be following the standing 'directions', issued by the tribunal in 2016.
Ah, right. So the OP now has the rejection letter and can now decide whether to pay-up, or register a case at London Tribunals.
-
It would help if we could read what you've described as "Reissue of letter" because the link you have labelled "FRONT" doesn't work.
It might explain where you are getting new deadline dates from, which, incidentally, you got wrong for the original PCN so best we see the new letter.
@ Incandescent.
They appear to be following the standing 'directions', issued by the tribunal in 2016.
-
I'm puzzled.At the stage you are at, (submitted reps but got no Notice of Rejection), the regulations state that the enforcing authority must pass the matter to the adjudicators for a decision.Is there anything about this in what you have received ?
See Regulation 23(7)&(8) in The Civil Enforcement of Road Traffic Contraventions (Approved Devices, Charging Guidelines and General Provisions) (England) Regulations 2022
(7) Where a witness statement is served including a statement under paragraph (2)(b), (c) or (d), the enforcement authority must refer the case to the adjudicator.
(8) Where a case is referred to the adjudicator—
(a)the adjudicator may give P and the enforcement authority (“the parties”) such directions as the adjudicator considers appropriate in the circumstances, and
(b)the parties must comply with those directions.
-
Evening all! (I'm back again with updates..and in need of further advice please)
The PCN has been reset by Brent (after receiving the required nod from the TEC) and Brent have since sent correspondence to the driver and it contains a copy of the NoR (which was never initially received). Had a look through it and noticed that Brent haven't even acknowledged the main point made in the original representations where the driver explicitly raised the issue of poor visibility due to the weather (heavy rain) and lighting conditions at 19:20hrs (dark - sunset was at 16:40hrs) . The NoR fails to address this point in any meaningful way and instead it looks as if they've relied on generic reasoning.
I noted from the cctv driver was sat in the YBJ for approx 13seconds (but hadn't blocked any traffic as no car approached from the left to join the main road). The fine is back at £80 if paid before the 14days .. and if appealing, to do that within 28days (last day Monday 26.05.26)
Reps are in the 1st [original post above, and the newer stuff below-
Reissue of Letter FRONT (http://https://ibb.co/8n8RV9xV) and BACK (https://ibb.co/209rj6zx)
Notice of Rejection FRONT (https://ibb.co/WptgK91t)and BACK (https://ibb.co/Cp0HLVX2)and LAST (https://ibb.co/zhvvf2gy)
Appeal Papers (https://ibb.co/Pv8gxG2w)unsure why there are two sets of the same thing..
Would really appreciate any hints/ tips on how to proceed.... and some general guidance to please!
Thanking in advance.
-
I made representations to Brent Council in respect of the above Penalty Charge Notice but did not receive a Notice of Rejection.
You don't need to write anything at all in the reasons box but if you insist then just the above is enough.
And tick the box that says the same.
-
The debt has finally been registered (as confirmed by a quick telephone call this morning) and Form PE3 had been printed while ago so will secure an appointment for it to be witnessed at the relevant court.
Please can you confirm if the following is OK to write in the 'My reasons are' (give full reasons) box
I, xxxxx of xxxxx solemnly and sincerely declare that I made representations to Brent Council in respect of the above Penalty Charge Notice but did not receive a Notice of Rejection.
I became aware that the matter had progressed upon receipt of the Charge Certificate.
I make this declaration believing the contents to be true.
Is the above sufficient?
-
Once the debt is registered at TEC, and you don't receive an OfR in reasonable time, you can download the form from TEC. Indeed, as there is only a limited time from the OfR to respond, you need to be prepared to do this. I would download the form from TEC and get it ready for signing, dating, and witnessing.
-
There is a final stage of the enforcement process after the Charge Certificate stage, which is when the council register the debt at the Traffic Enforcement Centre, (a court with no courts or judges !). When they do this, they must send you an Order for Recovery in the post. This will also include the form for submitting a Statutory Declaration on which you can state that you submitted representations, but did not receive a rejection. TEC will then cancel the Charge Certificate and the Order for Recovery, and the matter reverts to where you left of, having submitted representations. The council are informed and must then pass the matter to the adjudicators for a decision. Do note that the PCN remains outstanding.
So, do not pay the Charge Certificate (CC) or it's game over. However, you must now become proactive. When the period for payment of the CC expires the council can then register the debt, but can be tardy in doing so. You should receive the OfR in the post, but even so, phone TEC about every 7-10 days to find out if the PCN has been registered. ONce it has you can submit your Statutory Declaration. This needs to be witnessed, signed and dated either for a small fee and a solicitors or free at your local county court. This may seem to be a bit daunting but it's totally routine, with TEC processing many thousands a year. You can even download the form (PE3) from their website: -
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/form-pe3-challenge-an-unpaid-penalty-charge-notice
Thank you so much for the guidance. Will definitely let him know to NOT pay.
The date 14days after the CC expires 05.03.25 so will make note of that. Seeing no postal correspondence has been received thus far, will ensure to stay alert and call the Traffic Enforcement Centre regularly thereafter. However, if No letter is received from Brent, is the printable form enough to take the next step (after the debt has been registered ofcourse)?
-
What is labelled the front of the PCN is actually the charge certificate. Please could you provide a link to the original PCN front page.
Having viewed the video footage, the box junction markings are barely visible in the rain from the high vantage point of the camera, so probably even harder to see at driver level. Definitely worth raising when you get this PCN reset. The video shows a clear box junction contravention however so any defence will need to be either on the poorly marked lines or in respect of PCN defects which we can check out once you provide a link.
My apologies MrChips- I have indeed put the CC on where the PCN should have been and unfortunately unable to edit the original post.
The correct document is linked HERE - This shows the first page of the PCN (https://ibb.co/JR6hzxXH).
-
What is labelled the front of the PCN is actually the charge certificate. Please could you provide a link to the original PCN front page.
Having viewed the video footage, the box junction markings are barely visible in the rain from the high vantage point of the camera, so probably even harder to see at driver level. Definitely worth raising when you get this PCN reset. The video shows a clear box junction contravention however so any defence will need to be either on the poorly marked lines or in respect of PCN defects which we can check out once you provide a link.
-
There is a final stage of the enforcement process after the Charge Certificate stage, which is when the council register the debt at the Traffic Enforcement Centre, (a court with no courts or judges !). When they do this, they must send you an Order for Recovery in the post. This will also include the form for submitting a Statutory Declaration on which you can state that you submitted representations, but did not receive a rejection. TEC will then cancel the Charge Certificate and the Order for Recovery, and the matter reverts to where you left of, having submitted representations. The council are informed and must then pass the matter to the adjudicators for a decision. Do note that the PCN remains outstanding.
So, do not pay the Charge Certificate (CC) or it's game over. However, you must now become proactive. When the period for payment of the CC expires the council can then register the debt, but can be tardy in doing so. You should receive the OfR in the post, but even so, phone TEC about every 7-10 days to find out if the PCN has been registered. ONce it has you can submit your Statutory Declaration. This needs to be witnessed, signed and dated either for a small fee and a solicitors or free at your local county court. This may seem to be a bit daunting but it's totally routine, with TEC processing many thousands a year. You can even download the form (PE3) from their website: -
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/form-pe3-challenge-an-unpaid-penalty-charge-notice
-
Ignore this comment - can't figure out what I've done and how to get rid of this reply box!
-
Code 31 Yellow Box BRENT Salusbury Rd/ Hartland Rd NW6
PCN info can be found HERE on the Brent portal (https://brent.tarantoportal.com/PCN/)
PCN number BT27063176
VRM LD25XAZ
PCN Front (https://ibb.co/HT6LHzQp)and Back (https://ibb.co/TBDXJn3c)and Last (https://ibb.co/wZnSvkKt)
Charge Certificate Front (https://ibb.co/HT6LHzQp)and Back (https://ibb.co/wZnSvkKt)
Reps 4 screenshots 1 (https://ibb.co/S4MBWY8L), 2 (https://ibb.co/6RFv01CB), 3 (https://ibb.co/N6gRMj26) and 4 (https://ibb.co/TqTC4cMj)
Key Events Timeline (https://ibb.co/YB7stybh)
GSV HERE (https://maps.app.goo.gl/kEnQ9W228CegCbEa8)
I’m looking for some advice regarding a Brent Council yellow box PCN please.
Representations were submitted online on 18/11/2025 (the last permitted day). An auto acknowledgement email was received, but nothing further was ever sent from Brent via post nor email (no Notice of Rejection, nothing at all).
Out of the blue, a Charge Certificate has now arrived increasing the amount to £240 (received today)
This is a tad fishy (not getting mail from Brent) because something very similar happened recently to an elderly friend (posted his issue HERE (https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/53j-brent-council-no-nto-charge-cert-received-14day-deadline-tomorrow-but-letter/msg109265/#msg109265)) he also made representations and never received a response before a Charge Certificate was issued. Could 'this' be a thing - an attemp to prevent the public from raising pcn issues at adjudication?! ....Anyway....
With this current one,
Reps were made in time
No Notice of Rejection was received
No opportunity to appeal to the tribunal was given
Now a Charge Certificate has been served
The driver maintains that at the time of the alleged contravention the weather was extremely heavy rain (chucking it down- as per cctv footage) with poor visibility. He has since revisited the location and taken photographs a- Do the lines look OK to you guys?
First Pic (https://ibb.co/PGzRC4H5), Second Pic (https://ibb.co/tTr77f6P), Third Pic (https://ibb.co/DPj8QWk2) - He couldn't see them in heavy rain
Please can you advise on the next steps?
(Do you think he has a good argument? is there any possibility he could be let off as have since uncovered a similar one I've just come across from the PAST (https://www.ftla.uk/index.php?action=profile;u=262;area=showposts;start=15)) Looks like the pcn wording and the box is iffy.. d'oh!