Free Traffic Legal Advice

I'm getting a little short on time to make my appeal as I was waiting to hear from the National Highways. John UK suggested requesting an 'in person' or telephone hearing, in person would end up costing me nearly as much as the fine, by the time I've travelled from SE Kent to London, and there appears to be no option for a telephone hearing that I can see.
Below is the first draft of the written appeal - is this adequate? I would of course attach copies of all the relevant documents.

Penalty Charge Notice:- XJ26416867.
I am making this appeal on the grounds that no charge should be payable as the incident happened on an official diversion caused by closure of the M26 J2A and M25 motorway between junctions 5 and 6 on the night of 28th April.
• My representation was rejected by TfL primarily because “they could find no diversions into the ULEZ for the day in question”. I had not expected to have to provide proof of the road closure, especially something as major as the main London Orbital, so had not attempted to show evidence for this. I was amazed that they said that they could find no evidence for a diversion; I’d wrongly assumed TfL and National Highways would work together on this. I therefore needed supportive evidence so I did a Google search and found notification of the road closure overnight on 28th April and a map of the diversion on this site-
• https://favershamtowncouncil.gov.uk/national-highways-national-emergency-area-retrofit-programme-south-east/
• M25 junction 5 to 6 – the M25 junction 5 to 6 clockwise including all relevant slip, linking roads and M26 southbound to M25 junction 5 will be closed overnight on Sunday 28 April 2024.
Diversion: M25 junction 5 to 6 clockwise
I knew I had entered the ULEZ area and was concerned about being charged, but from TfLs website
https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/transparency/freedom-of-information/foi-request-detail?referenceId=FOI-0311-2324
They say “we implement an extensive signage strategy to ensure that all motorists are aware of the diversion and the route to follow. All ULEZ cameras along the diversion route are switched off. As long as the vehicle being diverted follows the diversion route a PCN will not be issued.”

Another website quoted National Highways senior project manager Jonathan Wade "Although the (Ulez) cameras will be active, no enforcement action will be taken.” https://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/24304072.m25-closure-ulez-fee-non-compliant-drivers-ignore-diversions/
As I had followed the diversion route as signposted I thought no more about it - until on returning from my holiday I received the PCN, which was for £90 as I had not paid the charge on time – which I didn’t need to pay as it was on an official diversion!
TfL say in their refusal of my representation letter that I could have purchased the charge up to 64 days prior to travel, completely missing the point that I had no intention or need to enter the ULEZ but was forced to do so by the road closures and diversion.[I was travelling from SE Kent to Gatwick Airport which were it not for the road closure would have been all on motorway and certainly would not have required purchase of a ULEZ charge.]
I have been waiting for National Highways to confirm in writing the road closure for the night of Sunday 28th April and to show the authorised diversion which I have now received, please see attached.
The diversion route indicated on the map essentially follows the A21, Farnborough Way being part of that route, which is where the camera recorded my vehicle.


Please let me know if I need more/less info for the appeal, or different wording.
thanks everyone for your time, it is truly appreciated.
Nick

Thanks John UK, I may opt for telephone hearing - frightened to drive anywhere near London now 

Are there any sample appeals on here so I can get an idea of the best way to set it out and what to put as reason for appeal?
My initial thoughts contain too many expletives :-)

I was travelling overnight from SE Kent to Gatwick Airport (planned 'normal' route M20, M26, M25, M23).
At junction 2A of the M20/M26 slip road, the M26 was coned off and traffic diverted. The diversion signs said follow signs to M25. Once I'd left the planned route I was rather at a loss to know exactly where the diversion was going to take me as the signs simply said M25. I realised that it took me back onto the M20 and then to J3 on the M25. I thought this was to be the end of the diversion and I would continue my clockwise journey around to the M23. However there was still no access to the south western section of the M25, and the diversion continued for some considerable distance on what I later found out was the A21 [I did not at the time have any idea where I was other than following diversion signs to the M25]. I realised I had entered a ULEZ zone and was annoyed that I was being forced into the zone by a diversion I didn't want to make. I followed the route to South Croydon and then on to the M25 where I had to head anti clockwise to pick up the route to the M23 and Gatwick Airport.
On arriving at the airport and talking to a fellow traveller about the difficult journey, and the forced entry into the ULEZ, but I was reassured that if the diversion took me into the ULEZ I would not be charged and indeed, he read out the statement from the TfL site "All ULEZ cameras along the diversion route are switched off.". This reassured me that I didn't have to do anything as I had to the best of my knowledge followed the diversion. This was a relief as I don't have a smart phone and had no real way of paying the ULEZ charge from my destination in Croatia.
However, on returning home 17 days later I received the PCN [see attached]. Not only had I been charged but the fee had increased to £90 because I'd not paid it within the allotted 3 days (which obviously I didn't think I had to do).
I of course made a representation, wrongly assuming it would be a simple matter of explaining the circumstances and in support I sent my Gatwick North terminal Car parking voucher and Flight details to prove that Gatwick was my destination and that I had never intended to go 20 miles out of my way to get there. I was rather naive with my appeal as it was obvious to me that it was only because of the diversion that I had entered the ULEZ and because of that, no fine was chargeable. I had, as far as I am aware followed the correct diversion signs but as I didn't know what roads were involved in the diversion, Farnborough Way meant nothing to me, so it was conceivable I could have gone wrong somewhere.
The representation was not upheld on the basis that, from what I understand in the letter, TfL could find no information on the road being closed or diversion in place!!! I had not sent supporting evidence that the road was closed and consequently I could have paid the ULEZ charge any time in the 64 days leading up to driving - they seem to have completely ignored the fact that I'd never intended using that route so had no reason to pay to use it.
Since receiving the representation refusal, I have contacted the National Highways authority and they have substantiated the road closure and sent a link to the authorised diversion. It shows that Farnborough Way Orpington is part of the official diversion, so as I had thought, I had followed the route as signed.
I certainly had not expected that it would be my responsibility to prove to TfL that the extremely busy and important London Orbital was closed so I suspect they are just flexing their muscle and using threatening means to bully people into paying the fines.
Should I just use the appeal form to set out my case, (I'm concerned that I need to make the appeal as watertight as possible as it is a 'last ditch' attempt to present my case and I don't know what else I need to include).. Or should I write again to TfL with the letter of road closure and route map supplied by National Highways to prove that I was forced to use the official diversion?
I would be very grateful for advice on how to proceed,
thank you in advance
Nick
https://imgur.com/a/SrFNqLS