Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hi all,

Good news!

The PCN was cancelled, thank you all for your help, I really appreicate it.

The cancellation letter read as follows;

Traffic Management Act 2004

Cancellation of your Penalty Charge Notice
 
Thank you for your communication regarding the above PCN.

The Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) issued the PCN, alleging that your vehicle was
parked with two wheels over a footpath. The regulations in London always prohibit
parking on the footway. Footway parking is enforced under Section 15 of the Greater
London Council (General Powers) Act 1974 as amended by section 15(2) of the London
Local Authorities Act 2000. Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1974
(legislation.gov.uk). You can review the photographic evidence at
https://www2.richmond.gov.uk/PCNViewer/ and add the PCN reference number and
vehicle registration.
 
You state that you have previously been advised by a Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO)
that you would not incur a PCN if you park on the footway due the this road being
narrow and I note your comment that you tried to park where you believed a footway
bay was present.

However I must start by advising that footway parking in London is prohibited at all
times. I can advise that our CEOs are trained and fully aware of this contravention. It
seems to me very improbable that a Richmond trained CEO offer such a comment and
our officers will issue a PCN should they encounter a vehicle in breach of the regulations, as was the case in this instance. Additionally, the issuing officer records
‘Driver Not Seen’.   

Footway parking is only permitted within a specially marked bay; this is identified with
white lines up onto the footway and signs indicating that footway parking is permitted.
There are no signs at this location, so footway parking is not allowed.

Parking with one or more wheels on the pavement is prohibited for many reasons; doing
so can cause a hazard for pedestrians including those who are blind and partially
sighted; it can also hinder wheelchair users and obstruct people with pushchairs. In
addition, there is the added potential for damage caused to pavements that are not
constructed to take the weight of vehicles, accidents arising because of falls or trips on
broken or uneven paving slabs and the increased costs of repairs to the pavements.

Notwithstanding the above, and after reviewing all the available photographs, I note the
presence of a faded bay line directly behind your vehicle which is confusing and
misleading. In these circumstances, the CEO should have reported the line and lack of
sign. Thank you for alerting me to this issue.

Please be assured that this matter has been forwarded to Parking Operations to
address as a CEO training issue. We have also requested that the lines and signs are
attended to.   

Any help with this, i think i have to appeal by tomorrow.

Thank you @stamfordman

How about this?

Dear London Borough of Richmond upon Thames,

I am writing to formally challenge the Parking Charge Notice issued to my vehicle on 14 March 2025, on Wyndham Crescent.

On the day in question, I parked my car in a marked bay on the footpath. While I acknowledge that part of my vehicle was over the line of the footpath, the car was still within the length of the bay, leaving sufficient space for other vehicles to pass freely along the road.

I was surprised to receive this PCN because I have previously discussed this specific parking arrangement with the traffic warden who regularly monitors the road. He assured me that no ticket would be issued under such circumstances, as the road is quite narrow and this form of parking ensures better access. This indicates either a change in approach or that someone else was on duty that day.

Furthermore, the alleged contravention may have occurred because part of my vehicle was outside the designated markings. However, it is worth noting that the parking bay markings on Wyndham Crescent were in an extremely worn state at the time. Due to their faded appearance, it was genuinely difficult to discern the boundaries of the bay, which inadvertently led to the positioning error.

Regarding the alleged contravention itself, I believe the markings themselves do not establish permitted parking; rather, their purpose is to delineate areas prescribed under a resolution passed by the council, as stipulated under section 15(4) of the Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1974. To confirm the validity of this PCN, I respectfully request that the council consult the relevant resolution to ensure that the markings comply with its provisions and that an actual contravention has occurred. I also request a copy of this resolution be provided should my appeal be rejected.

I ask that you take into account the mitigating factors outlined in this appeal. I have acted in good faith in relying on the advice of the traffic warden and have made every effort to park responsibly. Additionally, the unclear state of the bay markings further complicates the situation.

Thank you for taking the time to review my appeal. I trust that you will carefully consider the points raised, and I am hopeful for a positive resolution.

No problem, i don't really know where else to try so will have to just give it a shot.

Fair enough, I guess I have to try my luck.

Thank you