Free Traffic Legal Advice

Well, it gives you both an email address and a postal address that you can write to, so I don't understand your statement that "I am not sure what else I can do at this stage": why don't you just send them an email with a copy of the pay & display ticket attached and explain what happened?

Outcome.

@LemonTootski we don't allow duplicate accounts.

If Hippocrates has offered to help, I'd take him up on that.

Outcome.

I'd be very surprised if Oxford CC has not discussed this matter internally since they were made aware of it many years ago. Obviously they have a financial interest in denying any wrong doing. Have you CP8759 made any FOI requests from either Oxford or the communications between DfT and Oxford CC concerning this matter?

I have but it's all covered by legal professional privilege, which doesn't expire for 20 years from when the information was created. While for Exeter the 2030 cutoff isn't that far away now, Oxford's information is much more recent. The only way to sort this out would be to take it to court, but obviously given the choice of a criminal trial or a modest payment to make it go away, most people chose the easy option even if they are offered free representation.

So what's the point in providing Collaboration Certs then?

So that the prosecution can adduce evidence without having to produce a witness, thus saving time and expense. The absence of a certificate just means a witness would need to testify that the camera was working, and unless you could undermine the witness's evidence you'd be convicted, certificate or no certificate.

The fact that people would like certificates to be legally required is a bit like life after death: it's a nice idea, it would make many of us very happy if it were true, but the fact that we would like it to be true does not make it so.

If you want a defence, you'll have to find something else to argue.

This is arguable but probably not for a DIY appellant.