Free Traffic Legal Advice

But:
Are you the registered keeper with current DVLA details?

Please post a GSV link to the exact location, please.

I appeal on three grounds: (1) The contravention did not occur; (2) The penalty/other charge paid to have the vehicle released exceeded the amount applicable; (3) Procedural impropriety.

1) Contravention did not occur – inadequate / unclear signage at my position.
This was a long residents’ bay (≈30 m). On the removal date there was a single suspension sign at the far end of the bay, ≈27 m from my space; there was no sign near my vehicle and the permanent bay plate above the suspension plate remained visible. I did not see any indication that the space I used was suspended. The authority says its suspension signs are three-sided and DfT-authorised, but its photographs do not show a compliant three-sided unit with side arms. That raises serious doubt that a compliant sign was actually displayed, which would explain why no suspension was apparent from where I parked. In a long bay, with no three-sided unit with side arms and an uncovered permanent plate do not adequately convey that my specific position is suspended.

2) Penalty/other charge exceeded the amount applicable – removal/storage not applicable if relocation should have been used.
The Notice of Rejection (NoR) asserts the suspension sign was erected 04/08/2025 at 11:25 and that my VRM was not on the “already present” list. However, the authority has not produced the suspension-**** log, the vehicle-presence/VRM list, or **** photos. Its own Removal & Relocation Policy for contravention 21 requires that any vehicle recorded as present when the notices were erected must be relocated to the nearest lawful bay (not taken to the pound). If, on proper disclosure, the records show my vehicle was already present, the removal/storage charges were not applicable and must be refunded. If the authority cannot prove its assertion, the same conclusion follows: it has not discharged the burden to justify removal charges.

3) Procedural impropriety.
(a) Failure to consider: my formal reps raised the number/positioning of signs over a 30 m bay, the uncovered permanent plate, and the relocation-only policy. The NoR replies with bare assertions (including the 04/08/25 11:25 claim and “vehicle not on list”) but no supporting records and no engagement with the adequacy of signing at my position.
(b) Failure to disclose key documents reasonably requested and central to its case: the suspension **** log (with times/locations/photos and extent diagram), any VRM list, CEO photos and notes, the removal job sheet, the Traffic Order/TTRO/works authorisation, any DfT authorisation relied on, and the policy/decision record explaining why removal (not relocation) was used. The authority’s refusal/failure to provide these constitutes procedural unfairness.

Remedy sought.
Allow the appeal, cancel the PCN and direct a refund of £415 (PCN £80 + removal £280 + storage £55). In the alternative, please issue a direction requiring the authority to produce the items listed above; if it cannot produce them, draw an adverse inference and allow the appeal.

I will upload: PCN (front/back), pound receipt (£415), photo showing the single sign at the far end of the bay, my correspondence requesting disclosure, and the NoR. I reserve the right to file a fuller submission once the authority serves its evidence.