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.

Messages - fezster

Pages: [1] 2 3
1
Thanks all.

I did already go ahead and submit the online form and seems the advice is there is not much to fight here. Extremely frustrating as  I remember being very careful driving in the 20 zones that day, but obviously not careful enough!

2
I've received an NIP as the owner of the vehicle in question from the Met Police as follows:

Offence: Exceed a 20 MPH speed limit in contravention of a Local Traffic Order - Mobile Camera device

Date and time: 24/05/2026 18:18 hours
Location: A205 South Circular Road between junction A23 Brixton Hill and junction New Park Road, SW2

Recorded Speed: 25mph



I have gone online to the Star Portal to fill in details of the driver and on the submission page, the date/time is incorrect by an hour:

Summary of Alleged Offence
Notice number:
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
VRM:
xxx
Offence:
Exceed a 20 MPH speed limit in contravention of a Local Traffic Order - Mobile Camera device
Offence date/time:
24 May 2026 19:18
Location:
A205 South Circular Road between junction A23 Brixton Hill and junction New Park Road, SW2



Should I still submit this, even though it is incorrect?

And is there any plausible defence here?

3
I took pictures a couple of weeks later (all the signs were still exactly the same - not been replaced - still painted over).

These are the closer pictures of the signs upon entry to the PPA from Ilford Lane -> Jersey Road:

GSV Link: https://tinyurl.com/4e39nnts









4
Got it - will wait for NtO and submit the same as previous for formal representation. Then wait for inevitable rejection and come back here for next steps. Appreciate it!

5
What would you put my chances of success on this?

I'm normally up for the fight, on principle alone. However, part of me is considering just paying the reduced rate and move on ...

6
Received the following rejection today in the post from Redbridge. To be expected, I guess. For some reason I had hope they might apply a bit of reason.

What are next steps here? I thought it would now go to London Tribunals - but the letter says to wait for the NtO and then submit another formal representation (which I presume will be rejected for the same reason) and only then can it be taken to the independent ajudicator - is that right?




7
Thank you very much. Submitted the representation and will update once I receive a reply.

My representation is below (for reference):

Quote
Dear Sir or Madam,

All photos referred to are in the attached word document and labelled with a heading.

I wish to challenge the above Penalty Charge Notice.

I am not local to this area and am unfamiliar with the parking restrictions that may apply. I, therefore, have to rely on the signage in place to be informed of any restrictions.

The alleged contravention did not occur because the restriction was not clearly signed in accordance with the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions (TSRGD).

The route I took into Paget Road was from Ilford Lane → Jersey Road → Lowbrook Road → Paget Road. At no point along this route were the restriction signs visible or legible:

•   The entry signs to Jersey Road were defaced (photo 1)
•   All signs along Jersey Road were defaced (photos 2 - 5).
•   On Paget Road, the sign adjacent to where the vehicle was parked was facing the wrong way and defaced (photos 6–7).
•   On Lowbrook Road, the only other visible sign from this location was also defaced (photo 8).
•   On Lowbrook Road, the next nearest sign within walking distance was also defaced (photo 9).

I note that your Civil Enforcement Officer’s evidence has photographed a sign roughly 100 metres from where the vehicle was parked (photo 10 which the CEO produced as evidence). I have attached photo 13 which shows the location of the 5 closest signs, circled in green, to the parking space - all of which were defaced. The CEO had to walk 100m (photo 14 showing the distance to this sign) to the sign marked "number 4" in order to produce a photo for evidence. This is further confirmed by the timestamp on the photo which is 3 minutes after the photo of the vehicle was taken, showing they needed to walk some considerable distance.

I also note that the CEO seems to have intentionally not photographed the defaced sign right next to the parked vehicle. The angle of the photo they have taken conveniently leaves this sign out of shot (photo 11). You can refer to my own photo 15 and photo 16 showing the defaced sign next to the vehicle. This demonstrates that the signage within the vicinity of the vehicle was inadequate.

The TSRGD and associated case law and adjudicator decisions confirm that restrictions must be signed so they are clear, either upon entering a zone, or at the point of parking. Motorists cannot be expected to walk several minutes to discover a restriction, particularly when the nearest signs are obscured. As this is a zone where restrictions apply, the entry into the zone can be relied on to enforce those restrictions. However, as my evidence shows, this sign was also defaced.

In light of the above, I respectfully request that this Penalty Charge Notice be cancelled, as the contravention did not occur due to inadequate signage.


8
Done - looks like Imgur is doing something strange with the previously uploaded images. Let me know if these show ok.

Also - google drive link with all of the images referred to in my first post: https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/folders/1z9bwDy9vIGG_g6Iz4Xxk2oU6r70GGKm7






9
Thank you - I did read that page, and so it looks like I should go ahead and make a representation, as I will not receive anything in the post.

I'd like some advice on whether there are any technical challenges I can make on the PCN?

If not, whether or not the obscured signage (on both entry to the zone and in/around the parking spot), plus the fact the CEO has evidenced a sign 100m away - are these all strong grounds for an appeal? Or if anything else I should be considering or adding.

Thanks!

11
Can someone tell me what the sequence of events are after receiving a PCN attached to a car?

1. Is a notice sent in the post?
2. Does the 14 day window start from the notice in post (or the day the PCN was attached to the car)?
3. How many appeal stages there are?


12
How should I proceed? So far, I only have the PCN which was attached to the windscreen. Do I need to submit an informal appeal at this stage or should I wait for something in the post?

I've also pulled out a number of tribunal cases for this area which referenced obscured signage. I think all were refused - but they make reference to the signage on entrance to the zone, which in my case is also obscured.

London tribunal links:

Jersey Road:
---------------
2240159591
2240321124

Lowbrook Road:
---------------
224058052A
2250069032


Example appeal decision (224058052A):

Quote
The allegation in this case is that the vehicle was parked without payment of the parking charge. The Appellant criticises the quality of the signage. He says that there were no road markings and that time plates had been vandalised with black paint. He has provided video footage as supporting evidence.

The Enforcement Authority’s case is that the vehicle was parked in a Restricted Parking Zone. In a Restricted Parking Zone there is no requirement for road markings or roadside signs. The requirement is that entry point signs indicate restrictions to the motorist as he/she enters the zone. There may also be ‘repeater’ signs within the zone but the motorist is deemed to be on notice of the restrictions within the zone as he/she passes the entry point sign.

The appeal fails for a number of reasons. Firstly, the signs shown by the Appellant appear to be repeater signs which are not legally necessary. Second, it is noticeable the Appellant did not approach close to some of the signs which suggests they could still be read through the paint. Thirdly, no motorist should form the idea he can take advantage of such vandalism. The motorist who parks at a location where he genuinely cannot read the signage takes a chance and can have no reasonable complaint if issued a PCN.

I am satisfied the signage of restrictions was substantially compliant, clear and adequate.

Having considered all the evidence I am satisfied that the contravention occurred and that the PCN was properly issued and served. I am not satisfied that any exemption applies.

13
I've marked out the location of all of the signs around the vicinity of the parking spot.

There are four signs on Paget Road itself - each numbered on the lamppost on Google Street View. The CEO has taken a picture of number 4.




The entry from Ilford Lane onto Jersey Road has signs saying "Permit holders parking only past this point", which I can see on Google Street View from Sep 2024 (albeit, they do have some spray painted on them even back then!). I understand the council can rely on these signs alone to enforce tickets (i.e. the signs on the street are not technically required). However, as you can see from this image from my dashcam, these signs were totally illegible, especially whilst driving.


15
Won't that allow anyone to then potentially submit an appeal. Not sure why anyone would do that but feels wrong to put the information on a public forum. Happy to pm the details if that's a more secure way to do it.

Pages: [1] 2 3