1
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Havering, code 24, not parked within marked bay, St Mary's Lane
« on: April 13, 2026, 12:25:34 pm »
Thank you!
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
2
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Havering, code 24, not parked within marked bay, St Mary's Lane
« on: April 13, 2026, 10:13:14 am »
Thank you both.
I'll extract the points you've made into a letter and share wording here.
I'll extract the points you've made into a letter and share wording here.
3
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Havering, code 24, not parked within marked bay, St Mary's Lane
« on: April 10, 2026, 02:03:55 pm »
Latest from the council. Letter in the links:
https://ibb.co/FLz3Skc4
https://ibb.co/N6fNZXf5
As always, any advice welcome. Thanks in advance.
https://ibb.co/FLz3Skc4
https://ibb.co/N6fNZXf5
As always, any advice welcome. Thanks in advance.
4
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Havering, code 24, not parked within marked bay, St Mary's Lane
« on: March 16, 2026, 07:53:04 pm »
How about this:
Dear Sir or Madam,
I am writing to make a formal representation against the above Penalty Charge Notice on the grounds that the alleged contravention did not occur.
At the location where my vehicle was parked, traffic cones had been placed in a way that appeared to mark out a space. Their positioning reasonably gave the impression that parking within that area was permitted, and I therefore understood this to be an acceptable place to park.
In your response to my initial challenge, you stated that vehicles are only permitted to park within clearly marked bays along this road. However, this restriction is not clearly indicated by the signage present at the location.
On 28 January, I revisited the road and took photographs of the signs along it. These photographs show that the signs do not clearly state that parking is restricted to marked bays only.
For a restriction to be enforceable, it must be clearly communicated through signs and road markings. In this case, the signage does not clearly convey the requirement to park only in marked bays, and the placement of the cones added to the impression that parking in that location was permitted.
In light of this, I believe the alleged contravention did not occur and I respectfully request that the Penalty Charge Notice be cancelled.
Please find attached the photographs taken on 28 January showing the signage along the road.
Yours faithfully,
Dear Sir or Madam,
I am writing to make a formal representation against the above Penalty Charge Notice on the grounds that the alleged contravention did not occur.
At the location where my vehicle was parked, traffic cones had been placed in a way that appeared to mark out a space. Their positioning reasonably gave the impression that parking within that area was permitted, and I therefore understood this to be an acceptable place to park.
In your response to my initial challenge, you stated that vehicles are only permitted to park within clearly marked bays along this road. However, this restriction is not clearly indicated by the signage present at the location.
On 28 January, I revisited the road and took photographs of the signs along it. These photographs show that the signs do not clearly state that parking is restricted to marked bays only.
For a restriction to be enforceable, it must be clearly communicated through signs and road markings. In this case, the signage does not clearly convey the requirement to park only in marked bays, and the placement of the cones added to the impression that parking in that location was permitted.
In light of this, I believe the alleged contravention did not occur and I respectfully request that the Penalty Charge Notice be cancelled.
Please find attached the photographs taken on 28 January showing the signage along the road.
Yours faithfully,
5
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Havering, code 24, not parked within marked bay, St Mary's Lane
« on: March 16, 2026, 12:10:39 pm »
Something like this:
Dear Sir or Madam,
I am writing to make a formal representation against the above Penalty Charge Notice on the grounds that the alleged contravention did not occur.
For the purposes of these representations I am assuming that the cones which are shown clearly in my photos were placed by or with the permission of the council. Their presence had the effect of reducing the size of the bay by some 2m such that what remained had a length far less than the statutory minimum. But instead of suspending the use of what was now a redundant and unlawfully sized rump, the council chose to penalise a driver who tried their level best to fit within the space which remained.
Of course, if the cones were not placed as above, then the CEO should have removed them and invited the driver to reverse in order to regularise the situation.
In your response to my initial challenge, you stated that vehicles are only permitted to park within clearly marked bays along this road. However, this restriction is not clearly conveyed by the signage present at the location.
On 28 January, I revisited the location and took photographs of the signs along the road. These photographs demonstrate that the signage does not clearly indicate that parking is restricted solely to marked bays. As such, the restriction relied upon in your response is not adequately communicated to motorists.
For a parking restriction to be enforceable, it must be clearly indicated by appropriate signs and road markings so that a reasonably diligent motorist can understand the restriction. In this case, the signage along the road fails to clearly convey the requirement that vehicles must park only within marked bays, and the placement of the cones further contributed to the reasonable belief that parking in that position was permitted.
Given the lack of clear signage indicating this restriction, and the misleading placement of the cones, I believe the alleged contravention did not occur and that the Penalty Charge Notice has been issued incorrectly.
I therefore request that the Penalty Charge Notice be cancelled. Please find attached the photographs taken on 28 January which show the signage present along the road at the time.
I look forward to your confirmation that this notice has been cancelled.
Dear Sir or Madam,
I am writing to make a formal representation against the above Penalty Charge Notice on the grounds that the alleged contravention did not occur.
For the purposes of these representations I am assuming that the cones which are shown clearly in my photos were placed by or with the permission of the council. Their presence had the effect of reducing the size of the bay by some 2m such that what remained had a length far less than the statutory minimum. But instead of suspending the use of what was now a redundant and unlawfully sized rump, the council chose to penalise a driver who tried their level best to fit within the space which remained.
Of course, if the cones were not placed as above, then the CEO should have removed them and invited the driver to reverse in order to regularise the situation.
In your response to my initial challenge, you stated that vehicles are only permitted to park within clearly marked bays along this road. However, this restriction is not clearly conveyed by the signage present at the location.
On 28 January, I revisited the location and took photographs of the signs along the road. These photographs demonstrate that the signage does not clearly indicate that parking is restricted solely to marked bays. As such, the restriction relied upon in your response is not adequately communicated to motorists.
For a parking restriction to be enforceable, it must be clearly indicated by appropriate signs and road markings so that a reasonably diligent motorist can understand the restriction. In this case, the signage along the road fails to clearly convey the requirement that vehicles must park only within marked bays, and the placement of the cones further contributed to the reasonable belief that parking in that position was permitted.
Given the lack of clear signage indicating this restriction, and the misleading placement of the cones, I believe the alleged contravention did not occur and that the Penalty Charge Notice has been issued incorrectly.
I therefore request that the Penalty Charge Notice be cancelled. Please find attached the photographs taken on 28 January which show the signage present along the road at the time.
I look forward to your confirmation that this notice has been cancelled.
6
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Havering, code 24, not parked within marked bay, St Mary's Lane
« on: March 16, 2026, 11:30:49 am »
How does this sound:
Dear Sir or Madam,
I am writing to make a formal representation against the above Penalty Charge Notice on the grounds that the alleged contravention did not occur.
At the location where my vehicle was parked, a number of traffic cones had been placed in a manner that reasonably gave the impression that parking within that area was permitted. The cones were arranged in such a way that they appeared to define or mark a space in which a vehicle could park. I therefore reasonably interpreted their placement as an indication or invitation that parking within that coned area was acceptable.
In your response to my initial challenge, you stated that vehicles are only permitted to park within clearly marked bays along this road. However, this restriction is not clearly conveyed by the signage present at the location.
On 28 January, I revisited the location and took photographs of the signs along the road. These photographs demonstrate that the signage does not clearly indicate that parking is restricted solely to marked bays. As such, the restriction relied upon in your response is not adequately communicated to motorists.
For a parking restriction to be enforceable, it must be clearly indicated by appropriate signs and road markings so that a reasonably diligent motorist can understand the restriction. In this case, the signage along the road fails to clearly convey the requirement that vehicles must park only within marked bays, and the placement of the cones further contributed to the reasonable belief that parking in that position was permitted.
Given the lack of clear signage indicating this restriction, and the misleading placement of the cones, I believe the alleged contravention did not occur and that the Penalty Charge Notice has been issued incorrectly.
I therefore request that the Penalty Charge Notice be cancelled. Please find attached the photographs taken on 28 January which show the signage present along the road at the time.
I look forward to your confirmation that this notice has been cancelled.
Dear Sir or Madam,
I am writing to make a formal representation against the above Penalty Charge Notice on the grounds that the alleged contravention did not occur.
At the location where my vehicle was parked, a number of traffic cones had been placed in a manner that reasonably gave the impression that parking within that area was permitted. The cones were arranged in such a way that they appeared to define or mark a space in which a vehicle could park. I therefore reasonably interpreted their placement as an indication or invitation that parking within that coned area was acceptable.
In your response to my initial challenge, you stated that vehicles are only permitted to park within clearly marked bays along this road. However, this restriction is not clearly conveyed by the signage present at the location.
On 28 January, I revisited the location and took photographs of the signs along the road. These photographs demonstrate that the signage does not clearly indicate that parking is restricted solely to marked bays. As such, the restriction relied upon in your response is not adequately communicated to motorists.
For a parking restriction to be enforceable, it must be clearly indicated by appropriate signs and road markings so that a reasonably diligent motorist can understand the restriction. In this case, the signage along the road fails to clearly convey the requirement that vehicles must park only within marked bays, and the placement of the cones further contributed to the reasonable belief that parking in that position was permitted.
Given the lack of clear signage indicating this restriction, and the misleading placement of the cones, I believe the alleged contravention did not occur and that the Penalty Charge Notice has been issued incorrectly.
I therefore request that the Penalty Charge Notice be cancelled. Please find attached the photographs taken on 28 January which show the signage present along the road at the time.
I look forward to your confirmation that this notice has been cancelled.
7
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Havering, code 24, not parked within marked bay, St Mary's Lane
« on: March 13, 2026, 03:59:42 pm »
I don't know who put the cones out unfortunately.
Would love feedback on the draft representation I've made please - thanks in advance!
Would love feedback on the draft representation I've made please - thanks in advance!
8
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Havering, code 24, not parked within marked bay, St Mary's Lane
« on: March 10, 2026, 12:37:42 pm »
Here's a draft letter:
Dear Sir or Madam,
I am writing to make a formal representation against the above Penalty Charge Notice on the grounds that the alleged contravention did not occur.
In your response to my initial challenge, you stated that vehicles are only permitted to park within clearly marked bays along this road. However, this restriction is not clearly conveyed by the signage present at the location.
On 28 January, I revisited the location and took photographs of the signs along the road. These photographs demonstrate that the signage does not clearly indicate that parking is restricted solely to marked bays. As such, the restriction relied upon in your response is not adequately communicated to motorists.
For a parking restriction to be enforceable, it must be clearly indicated by appropriate signs and road markings so that a reasonably diligent motorist can understand the restriction. In this case, the signage along the road fails to clearly convey the requirement that vehicles must park only within marked bays.
Given the lack of clear signage indicating this restriction, I believe the alleged contravention did not occur and that the Penalty Charge Notice has been issued incorrectly.
I therefore request that the Penalty Charge Notice be cancelled. Please find attached the photographs taken on 28 January which show the signage present along the road at the time.
I look forward to your confirmation that this notice has been cancelled.
Dear Sir or Madam,
I am writing to make a formal representation against the above Penalty Charge Notice on the grounds that the alleged contravention did not occur.
In your response to my initial challenge, you stated that vehicles are only permitted to park within clearly marked bays along this road. However, this restriction is not clearly conveyed by the signage present at the location.
On 28 January, I revisited the location and took photographs of the signs along the road. These photographs demonstrate that the signage does not clearly indicate that parking is restricted solely to marked bays. As such, the restriction relied upon in your response is not adequately communicated to motorists.
For a parking restriction to be enforceable, it must be clearly indicated by appropriate signs and road markings so that a reasonably diligent motorist can understand the restriction. In this case, the signage along the road fails to clearly convey the requirement that vehicles must park only within marked bays.
Given the lack of clear signage indicating this restriction, I believe the alleged contravention did not occur and that the Penalty Charge Notice has been issued incorrectly.
I therefore request that the Penalty Charge Notice be cancelled. Please find attached the photographs taken on 28 January which show the signage present along the road at the time.
I look forward to your confirmation that this notice has been cancelled.
9
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Havering, code 24, not parked within marked bay, St Mary's Lane
« on: March 06, 2026, 05:07:33 pm »
Ok so per their letter and your advice I'll be making a representation. Which item should I tick on the fourth page under MAKING REPRESENTATIONS? Bearing in mind my argument is that it is not clearly sign posted that you have to park within the marked bays and I have photo evidence.
Thanks again
Thanks again
10
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Havering, code 24, not parked within marked bay, St Mary's Lane
« on: March 05, 2026, 06:32:42 pm »
Hi all,
Any advice out there, would be much appreciated!
Any advice out there, would be much appreciated!
11
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Havering, code 24, not parked within marked bay, St Mary's Lane
« on: March 02, 2026, 05:09:08 pm »
Hi all,
Just received the NtO today. Photos in the links below. Any advice on best next steps, welcomed - thanks in advance.
https://ibb.co/gZfStzNG
https://ibb.co/hJSXrwPZ
https://ibb.co/qLsTZb6m
https://ibb.co/VYPRMyF5
Just received the NtO today. Photos in the links below. Any advice on best next steps, welcomed - thanks in advance.
https://ibb.co/gZfStzNG
https://ibb.co/hJSXrwPZ
https://ibb.co/qLsTZb6m
https://ibb.co/VYPRMyF5
12
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Havering, code 24, not parked within marked bay, St Mary's Lane
« on: January 30, 2026, 12:28:38 pm »
Thanks all.
No idea why the cones were there. I'll keep you all posted
No idea why the cones were there. I'll keep you all posted
13
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: Havering, code 24, not parked within marked bay, St Mary's Lane
« on: January 28, 2026, 01:05:43 pm »
Here's the GSV: https://maps.app.goo.gl/FgtXkCBLFeScsziLA?g_st=ac
And yes it's me.
And yes it's me.
14
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Havering, code 24, not parked within marked bay, St Mary's Lane
« on: January 28, 2026, 12:01:56 pm »
Hi there, I was issued a council PCN on 3rd Jan for parking outside of the marked bay. At the time there were cones either side of the bay obstructing me from parking inside a bay but the bay I used was definitely available to park in. The traffic warden himself said to appeal. I did appeal, however, they upheld their decision siting that the regulations are clearly shown and that I can either pay £90 (having unknowingly waived my right for a reduced amount when I appealed) or wait to make a formal representation of refer the case to London Tribunals.
I returned to the street where I was fined and there are no notices stating I have to park within the marked bays.
Please can I have advice on best next steps?
https://ibb.co/fz6cm6sx
https://ibb.co/4nrNHf6h
https://ibb.co/JW7TTzFd
https://ibb.co/cSnCJFwX
https://ibb.co/pjVJ13KW
https://ibb.co/k2MPB8xT
https://ibb.co/5QBGTGF
https://ibb.co/N2FJ5td4
https://ibb.co/6Cj788M
I returned to the street where I was fined and there are no notices stating I have to park within the marked bays.
Please can I have advice on best next steps?
https://ibb.co/fz6cm6sx
https://ibb.co/4nrNHf6h
https://ibb.co/JW7TTzFd
https://ibb.co/cSnCJFwX
https://ibb.co/pjVJ13KW
https://ibb.co/k2MPB8xT
https://ibb.co/5QBGTGF
https://ibb.co/N2FJ5td4
https://ibb.co/6Cj788M
15
Private parking tickets / Re: Claim Form from DCB legal for overstaying in G24 car park in 2019
« on: January 28, 2026, 11:29:23 am »
Fyi everyone G24/DCB Legal discontinued the case. Thank you so much to all the people who helped.