Free Traffic Legal Advice

Ha, have got a reply from the council just now.

I challenged contravention on the 24th of August and got their reply on the 25th of October  - this is exactly 2 months.
Is there a timeframe in which they are obligated to come back, or 2 months still fine?


This is what they came back with
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/okin6ryfqccfcghvu5ksu/ADQ8X4PislMB3H-a-M3Rbt0?rlkey=xsd4ddig4vb5ey0w7guwyndp6&st=ek9xbgy1&dl=0

Are there any good grounds for the tribunal?
Not sure if the provided photograph is close to the parked car.

Who hired it. Make a pdf

Will attached this as evidences.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/ovgmqlpny7pj7iu3r3w39/Dear-Merton.pdf?rlkey=8iy3yuxwfgjbr7k9oq2ytgwh4&st=00taff6p&dl=0

In text box will put something like this:

Dear Merton,

Kindly refer to the attached document for the complete text of my appeal.

Hippocrates - thank you very much, this is very helpful!

Hello me again.

First, it is not a bus lane but a bus gate.

Their website grounds:

Moving Traffic reasons
The following reasons relate to moving traffic contraventions

...................
..................
..................

None of the above

If none of the above reasons apply, and you wish to challenge your PCN, please select below:

Select a reason:

Any other reason 


*****

I would simply write at this stage that the sign was not visible.  Keep it simple. (To me, it also looks twisted a little and is very high up. And the legend on the road is not clear as it is faded.) As ever, happy to do this one for you.

Hey Hippocrates,

Let's see if anything comes from reviewing the second page of the PCN. If it turns out to be the best course of action, I'd be happy to file the objection myself. I'm very grateful for all your helpful advice, and I don't want to take up your time on something so minor.

Hey, it is me again.

My wife drove over bus lane, she was saying big lorry was in front of her and she could not see road signs.
This time council provided pretty solid evidences - I do not think there is any room for objections.
Before advising this to my wife, would like to check with an experts.
So this is the PCN itself
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/f1d8tvpihy1ajnrzhggcb/Penalty-Charge-Notice.pdf?rlkey=srcsgw8y868q081aqw5ipijbb&st=xc9en03h&dl=0

Suggested draft as I expect it best to leave the website issue until the Tribunal stage:

What website issues are being referenced here?

Have got evidences video recording.

I can't copy and paste at the moment for some reason but the grounds on the website are rubbish and we win cases on this. They only concern mitigation.

Please take a screenshot yourself and try and enter "procedural impropriety" and note the result! I have given you this ground because I know it. How are you expected to know it? I won a case v Kingston last week on the same issue. But this website is even worse.

para 4 in this link explains why:

https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/london-borough-of-havering-31j-pcn-entering-and-stopping-in-box-junction-pcn-mai/msg34141/#msg34141

I will dig out the most appropriate case by Miss Alderson.

Hmmm, not sure if I follow here.
This is what they have got on their website:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/u4lsqubw3hync3mvo7iq6/Screenshot-2024-08-22-at-21.43.12.png?rlkey=fx88tm0v4h4a452o0424n8qvz&st=5ei95g8z&dl=0



What actually can be objected here - information given by council website or the fact that parking sign is confusing and one part of it contradicts other two?