Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hi sjcuk7,

There is no need to call them, let them take as long as they wish as it only reinforces your case to dismiss it.

You can check it in their portal if it's still showing as a live PCN.

As and when it goes to Tribunal, if it does, you have plenty to use in your appeal to be successful.

Thanks and regards,

Almep13

Good morning,

I am glad to announce that London Tribunals emailed me this morning to say that LBHF won't contest my appeal with Case Reference: 2250576030, hence my PCN is now cancelled.

You may use the Case Ref supporting your appeal if it comes to that. Just keep the faith and do your research if needed and you'll succeed in the end.

In regard to the sign, I believe the sign is still there, but covered by the tree branches.

Thanks to the forum and its members like Incadescent, my appeal was successful.

Thanks and regards,

Almep13

Good evening Hippocrates,

Thank you for the link and your valuable comments.

Kind regards,

Almep13

Hi Incadecent,

Thank you for the prompt response, I appreciate.

It's not Hounslow Borough, it's RBKC (Kensington & Chelsea), that's why you can't see it. Apologies, should have stated it in the title.

https://ocmlive.xrxpsc.com/rbkc/ocm-fe/ocm/Details.aspx

Kind regards,

Almep13

Hi Incandescent,

Thank you for your comments. I am well aware of the subjective matter of which the Adjudicator may sway either way. Unfortunately, there's no other way to find out other than go all the way to London Tribunal. A risky move as I may end up paying double the price and that's why such laws and regulations are stacked up against the common person.

I am incensed of how councils like LBHF introduce such schemes mainly to raise revenue rather than having the well being of its residents as their primary objective. This is the same council who for years wouldn't even allow installation of zebra crossing 100m away from the pedestrian and cycle zone to allow the school children to pass the road safely to go to school.

Thank you for your views, I appreciate them.

Have a nice evening.

Kind regards,
Almep13

This is what an 'end of zone' sign looks like. It is not the blank backside of a gateway 'in' sign.

Items 3 and 4 in the Part 2 table: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/8

If neither of these is present then the zone has been improperly signed - again- because the entry signs convey a prohibition which must be correctly terminated.

Good morning H C Andersen,

I hope you had a nice week-end.

It seems clear that LBHF hasn't complied with end zone signs. However, an old manual from 2008, Traffic Signs Manual, seems to suggest that it's "not a requirement to have the end zone" (p.94, point 11.13 as per link below). I wonder if the Adjudicator may sympathise with the fact that LBHF hasn't complied with the Schedule 8, Part 2 regarding the end zone, but still uphold the alleged contravention of entering the pedestrian and cycle zone during the restricted time period indicated in the signs.

http://www.pedestriansafety.org.uk/files/traffic-signs-manual-chapter-03-2.pdf - pls see p.94, point 11.13

Nearby, two side roads along South Parade in Turnham Green, W4, part of Ealing Borough, were literally covered with black plastic bin bags a week ago and I presume either for amending the time restrictions and/or adding the end zones. Two neighboroughing boroughs having two different approaches to end zone signs for similar pedestrian and cycle zones. I attach some pictures for comparison. However, I wonder if showing these signs will sway the Adjudicator to consider the signs used by LBHF invalid or insufficient to prevent the contraventions from taking place.

https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/acoPTy5_xl.jpg - The Orchard W4 - Pedestrian and Cycle Zone Signs
https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/yiosBJ0_xl.jpg - The Orchard W4 - Zone Ends
https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/rjoagOI_xl.jpg - Newton Grove W4 - Pedestrian and Cycle Zone Signs
https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/F0SDBv7_xl.jpg - Newton Grove W4 - Zone Ends
https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/o8FsFCR_xl.jpg - Bedford Rd W4 - Pedestrian and Cycle Zone Signs
https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/ayxUnCk_xl.jpg - Bedford Rd W4 - Zone Ends

I attach below copies of the TMO that LBHF provided me.

https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/lZtcMc1_xl.jpg - TMO Cobbold Rd - p.1
https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/bwnXlWt_xl.jpg - TMO Cobbold Rd - p.2

What's your view on potential position that the Adjudicator may take that despite LBHF having failed to provide signs relating to end zones, the contravention did occur regardless and as such rejects the appeal?

Thank you and regards,

Almep13

This is what an 'end of zone' sign looks like. It is not the blank backside of a gateway 'in' sign.

Items 3 and 4 in the Part 2 table: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/8

If neither of these is present then the zone has been improperly signed - again- because the entry signs convey a prohibition which must be correctly terminated.

Hi H C Andersen,

here is the TMO for Cobbold Rd. LBHF were kind enough to email it to me quickly.

https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/lZtcMc1_xl.jpg - TMO Cobbold Rd - p.1
https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/bwnXlWt_xl.jpg - TMO Cobbold Rd - p.2

I'm starting to feel optimistic again.

Thank you to both of you including Incandescent for your time and comments, I appreciate them.

Have a nice week-end both.

Kind Regards,

Almep13

Quote from: almep13 on October 17, 2025, 10:36:14 am

Quote from: Incandescent on October 17, 2025, 10:11:38 am

Quote

My three points below would be the main arguments to present to London Tribunals with the correction that time limit on traffic moving PCNs is 3 months. Is such time limit valid?

Alleged contravention date - 25th June 2025, PCN date - 7th July. The time limit to serve a PCN is 28 days from date of alleged contravention.

Good morning Incandescent,

the time limit I was referring to was the time it took LBHF to respond to my appeal i.e. I submitted my appeal on the evening of 08 July and LBHF rejected it on 08 Oct serving it to me initially via email and then through a postal letter so that they could include the appeal form to London Tribunals.

Is there such a 3 months time limit for councils to respond to motorists' appeals for moving traffic PCNs or am I misunderstanding and misinterpreting?

Thank you and kind regards,

Almep13

Your PCN was issued under the LLA and TfL Act 2003. There is no time limit in this Act for responding to representations against a PCN. However, 3 months is getting into unfairness territory. Adjudicators in London Tribunals usually consider a response beyond 3 months as unfair as it prejuices the appellant who may have problems remembering tehe circumstances and also evidence becomes more difficult to obtain.

Under the Traffic Management Act 2004, there is a limit of 56 days to respond to formal representations.

With 3 months just barely passing on the date of response by LBHF, it's hard to judge how the Adjudicator is going to lean on such point. What's your view, does it have any small chance of success? Obviously, this is a call for me to make and risk to take of paying double the price, but I would appreciate your frank view on this.

The other point to raise is that such "unfairness" is not listed under the grounds of appeal and I wonder if it needs to be aligned to "contravention did not occur".

Thank you and kind regards,

Almep13