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.
Grounds for appeal: The contravention alleged by the authority on the penalty charge notice did not occur
To: The London Tribunals
Re: Appeal Against PCN AG48660755 – Barnet Council
Dear Adjudicator,
I am writing to formally appeal Penalty Charge Notice number AG48660755, issued by Barnet Council, on the grounds of inadequate signage and procedural impropriety in the handling of my formal representation.
Grounds for Appeal
The alleged contravention occurred at the entrance to a pedestrian zone. However, the signage at this location is inadequate, obscured, and poorly positioned, making it difficult for motorists to observe and comply with the restriction.
At the time of the alleged contravention:
The early warning sign and the right-hand side sign at the junction were significantly obscured by foliage, reducing their visibility.
The left-hand sign was angled away from the line of approach, making it very difficult to notice or read in time.
The junction is a mini-roundabout, where drivers must prioritise vehicles from the right. This inherently shifts the driver’s focus away from signage that is already compromised, in contrast to a typical T-junction where more attention can be given to signs.
I provided photographic evidence with my original representation clearly showing these issues.
Procedural Impropriety
In its Notice of Rejection, Barnet Council failed to properly consider the evidence I submitted. The response did not address:
The photographic evidence demonstrating the obscured and misaligned signs.
The relevant adjudicator precedents, namely:
Case 2240410290
Case 2240408084
Case 2240410279
Each of these cases concerns this exact location and highlights similar issues of inadequate signage. The adjudicators in all three appeals found in favour of the appellants, and notably, Barnet Council has not challenged any of these rulings, thereby setting a clear precedent.
The Council’s failure to engage with either the photographic evidence or the cited precedents constitutes a failure to give proper consideration, amounting to a procedural impropriety under the relevant regulations.
Request
In light of the above—the obscured and inadequate signage, the specific layout of the junction, the clear precedents, and the Council's failure to engage meaningfully with the evidence—I respectfully request that the adjudicator allows this appeal and cancels the penalty charge.
Thank you for your time and attention.
Yours faithfully,
etc
...honestly no malice on my part, had no idea I'd (allegedly) contravened anything. A few weeks ago had to do some extra school runs and apparently I went through a street which is restricted at specific times. Noticed no signage whatsoever at the time.
