Free Traffic Legal Advice

Here are the apendices to my initial appeal

Appendix A – Signage layout and proximity of restrictions (viewed from Temple Mills Ln)
Appendix B - Signage layout from within the car park (viewed from usual exit where you can clearly see no entry signs on LHS)
Appendix C – Additional still image held by authority (15:18:51 BST)


Appendix A : https://imgpile.com/p/c6Tm3D0#gKJzX1Z
Appendix B : https://imgpile.com/p/c6Tm3D0#iIPqWqu
Appendix C : https://imgpile.com/p/c6Tm3D0#0gNQSmA

This was my appeal (prob too long)

I am the registered keeper of the above vehicle and wish to make formal representations regarding the alleged contravention (Code 51J – Failing to comply with a no entry restriction) said to have occurred on 23 April 2026 at Temple Mills Lane E20 / Celebration Avenue E20.

I, as the registered keeper, requests cancellation of this Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) on the basis that the circumstances surrounding the alleged contravention were unusual and the available evidence does not present the full context of events.

On the date in question, the driver had intended to leave the area using the normal route from the adjacent car park. However, that exit was unexpectedly closed due to construction works within the car park. As a result, the driver had to perform a U-turn within the car park and exit via the entrance. The driver was unfamiliar with the altered layout and was therefore using the additional assistance from navigation guidance which was simultaneously recalculating following the diversion from the intended exit.

The layout encountered immediately upon exiting was confusing. There is no immediately visible “No Entry” signed to the left. Once turning left out of the entrance there are multiple “No Entry” signs in close proximity serving different purposes: those signs associated with the adjacent car park and those associated with the bus gate restriction. Two such (non-related) signs appear within only a few metres of each other. In addition, one of the roadside signs on the opposite side of the carriageway appears partially obscured by foliage, reducing visibility on approach. The positioning and concentration of signage, particularly when approaching from an unexpected direction due to closure of the intended exit, materially increased the likelihood of confusion. Evidence of the proximity of multiple restrictions and obscuration is attached (Appendix A).

Had the intended exit route been available, the driver departing normally through the actual exit would instead have encountered a materially clearer arrangement consisting of a single fully visible no-entry restriction applicable to buses and cycles together with another sign on the opposite side (that is partially obscured by foliage). By contrast, the altered exit route placed several restrictions close together in a way that did not clearly distinguish restrictions applying to the road from those associated with the adjacent car park. Evidence of the signage at the usual exit is attached (Appendix B)

Upon realising an error may have been made and that the route appeared inconsistent with the navigation guidance, the driver slowed substantially and began corrective action. The available footage appears to show the vehicle reducing speed to a near stop or complete halt. The driver’s intention was not to continue through a restricted route but to correct the mistake immediately.

The keeper also has concerns regarding the completeness of the CCTV evidence disclosed.

The downloadable CCTV clip supplied by the authority commences at approximately 15:18:36 BST (23424005) and ends at approximately 15:18:43 BST (23424220). The clip appears to show significant braking and reduction in speed before ending.

The keeper also notes that the downloadable online footage ends (as stated above) at approximately 15:18:43, whereas additional still images supplied by the authority are timestamped beyond that point (including imagery at approximately 15:18:51 - 23424453). This indicates that the authority possesses records of events occurring after the disclosed clip ends.

The footage available online therefore appears incomplete and may omit material showing the vehicle stopping and immediately correcting course. The keeper requests that the authority review and disclose the complete unedited recording before determining these representations.

The keeper is concerned that the online video available for review may not represent the full sequence of events. The still images provided as evidence appear to continue beyond the timestamps shown in the online clip. If the vehicle subsequently stopped and turned around immediately after the footage ceased, that context is directly relevant to assessing the circumstances and whether discretion ought to be exercised.

In light of the above, the keeper respectfully requests:

1. Disclosure and review of the complete unedited CCTV recording, including footage before, during and after the alleged contravention, before these representations are determined;
2. Confirmation whether the online clip made available to the keeper has been truncated or edited;
3. Disclosure of any additional footage, still images or records relied upon;
4. Confirmation that all footage showing the vehicle’s actions after 15:18:43 BST has been provided.
5. Consideration of the unusual circumstances, namely

•   unexpected closure of the intended exit route
•   the unusual routing circumstances
•   reliance on recalculating navigation following the unexpected diversion
•   the close proximity of multiple no-entry signs serving different restrictions
•   the partial obscuration of signage
•   the immediate slowing and corrective action once the driver recognised a possible mistake
•   concerns regarding incomplete disclosure of CCTV evidence,

The keeper submits that these circumstances materially contributed to confusion and that enforcement in this case would not reflect the purpose of the restriction, given the apparent immediate attempt to correct the situation.

The keeper respectfully requests that the authority exercise discretion and cancel the Penalty Charge Notice.

The keeper further notes that the notice came to attention only after returning home following an extended absence, despite the driver remaining at the address and not opening correspondence addressed to the registered keeper. The representations have therefore been made promptly upon the keeper becoming aware of the PCN. If the authority is not minded to cancel the notice, the keeper respectfully requests that discretion be exercised to preserve the discounted payment amount.
Yours faithfully,

Joanne Bourne
Registered Keeper

Attachments:
Appendix A – Signage layout and proximity of restrictions (viewed from Temple Mills Ln)
Appendix B - Signage layout from within the car park (viewed from usual exit)
Appendix C – Additional still image held by authority (15:18:51 BST)

https://maps.app.goo.gl/23PtoVMaaNMT1eTWA

I have received a PCN for my daughter allegedly failing to comply with a no entry restriction.

I only opened the PCN today as it is addressed to me (I am the owner) and I have been away. The date of the PCN is 30/04/26. Do I have to appeal by tomorrow to fix the PCN amount to the reduced rate or do I have a full 28 days to appeal and, if rejected, the reduced rate remains?

My daughter was running a free hockey camp and was told to use this car park as the school one was closed. She had never been there before. On exiting she had to leave through the entry because the exit was blocked off with a digger and road works.

As she had never been there she was using waze which she initially thought told her to turn left. She saw the 3 no entry signs but thought they related to the car park exit that was blocked.

After driving 10/20m down road, Waze started yelling at her and you can see her braking in the video. She immediately did a u-turn at the give way markings on the road but the video cuts off at 8 seconds so you can't see this. You can however see her braking. I don't know if the council has deliberately cut the video off at this stage. The no entry sign on the RHS is blocked by tree cover if you look on googlemaps.

She has now received a PCN and I don't know if there are any grounds to appeal. The 3 no entry signs are very close together and I can see how she might have got confused, especially as waze sometimes takes a few attempts to figure out where you actually are once you've started moving.


4 pages of PCN
https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/13TZoBi_xl.png
https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/6fzoHiH_xl.jpg
https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/f6H4s9h_xl.jpg
https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/zEnBFYz_xl.jpg

image of no entry signs from googlemaps
https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/iakdLb1_xl.png

shared location from googlemaps
https://maps.app.goo.gl/iksmS3gPjCyp3MVw9

I think this covers everything per the instructions for uploading.

I hope that someone can help
Many thanks in advance

I have done under a new thread for ease.. using the topic title as requested. What you guys do is amazing and much appreciated. Just didn't want him needlessly reading my waffle and investigating something that might just be "pay the full whack"
Thanks

Hi
Thanks for your reply.

I am not trying to appeal the PCN as there is no appeal: I simply didn't pay the congestion charge and forgot to.

I was more asking about the 14 day window for reduced payment and when it kicks in.

If date was 7 jan but not received until 12 or 13th Jan then the 14 day window expires today. I was away when the letter was delivered so can't be sure but as I said we only get 2 deliveries a week. We arrived back from holiday on 24th and I'm going through mail for the first time today, when I posted on here straight away. Oxford COunty COuncil allows 2 days for delivery ... we frequently get government and official letters up to a week (sometimes more) past the posting date.

The payment website won't let me pay £35 reduced amount as they consider that it's outside 14 days.

What can I do? I don't want to pay full amount

Thanks

@DWMB2 @b789 many thanks for this. I forgot to post that Mum's appeal was successful. Thanks for your help!

Dear b789 and @DWMB@

Thanks so much for clarifying. You guys are the best - at helping but also explaining so that we understand.

I shall pass this on to my dad and he shall appeal on my mum's behalf.

I'll update when we here back.

Happy 2025