The boundary between the two bays is incorrectly marked. It should consist of double lines perpendicular to the kerb. This is because in TSRGD a bay is defined in Schedule 7 Part 4 Item 6 (Diagram 1028.4). So two bays with seperate restrictions, must have their own boundary, thus making a double perpendicular line mandatory. Here, it is only a single line.
Thanks, I didn't know that. Just to confirm a few things - is TSRGD something that must be followed or simply guidance - i.e. if the signage and markings are improper is that enough to invalidate the PCN? And are my arguments regarding the signage valid? I suppose they would say that there was another, but the photos do show that it wasn't the closest to my car.
Would therefore plan to appeal with the following:
1. Boundary not marked, should be double line - TSRGD Schedule 7 Part 4 Item 6
2. Signage inadequate, missing symbol - TSRGD Schedule 4 Part 2 Paragraph 10 Sub-Paragraph 1; TSRGD Schedule 4 Part 4 Item 2
I was going to draft a representation but just realised that I can't submit a rep until a NtO turns up - I assume it's intentional that I can't do it during the reduced penalty period, forcing me to take a gamble.
In which case - while I understand no one has a crystal ball - does it seem like I have a good chance at a successful appeal?