Free Traffic Legal Advice

Response received yesterday:

I refer to your recent correspondence regarding the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN).
I have investigated your appeal and you are correct that the incorrect contravention code was
used as you were not parked adjacent a dropped kerb.
However, where the vehicle was parked is not a parking space, and I would advise you not to
park in this location in the future.
In view of all the circumstances, I will cancel the PCN on this occasion only, but this PCN will be
served as a warning and any future infringement in the parking regulations may not be looked
upon sympathetically.
This matter is now considered closed

Why are they making it out that they’re doing me a favour by cancelling this PCN? They should stick to the facts and not be personal about it.

How is this for a final draft taking in all points above.

I write to challenge PCN number KM22600963 issued for an alleged contravention under Code 27.

The contravention did not occur, for the following reasons:
   1.   The location is not part of the carriageway.
The surface where the vehicle was parked, including the kerb and blocks, is continuous with the footway. As such, the vehicle was not on the carriageway as required under Section 86(1) of the Traffic Management Act 2004.
   2.   If the council maintains the vehicle was on the carriageway, then no part of it was parked adjacent to a lowered footway serving a statutory purpose. There is no evidence of a pedestrian crossing, cycle access, or driveway at this location.
   3.   The lowered kerbs running parallel to the location are not valid for enforcement.
Section 86 applies only to kerbs that serve a crossing or access point. Long stretches of lowered kerb not opposite a corresponding crossing point or access do not qualify.

In the absence of the legal conditions required to support a Code 27 contravention, I request cancellation of the PCN and look forward to confirmation.

Thanks for the inputs. Are the blocks really indicative of a footway? Can see the footpath either side of this lowered area have some sort of drainage blocks and the lowered blocks are there just to cover the drains.

Also as this was a  entrance to a road in the past, could it be that the old road was a private road and maybe that’s why they haven’t made a proper footpath in this part?


[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Got a Code 27 PCN in a industrial estate for parking in a unmarked lay-by type of section. No signs or road markings. Cars parked on footpath ahead of me and behind me received no PCN's.

Location: https://maps.app.goo.gl/iuJEaQ5A7T3W4Hyg7

Got a little freind to help draft an appeal letter. Does this sound ok or the points raised are invalid?

Dear Kirklees Parking Enforcement Team,

I am writing to formally challenge PCN number KM22600963, issued to my vehicle YA23 XWD on 18/06/25, for the alleged contravention under Code 27 – “Parked in a special enforcement area adjacent to a footway, cycle track or verge lowered to meet the level of the carriageway.”

I respectfully request that the PCN be cancelled for the following reasons:

1. This Location Is Not a Special Enforcement Area

The area where the vehicle was parked is not part of a special enforcement area, as the footpath terminates before this point. The section in question is a widened part of the carriageway, not a footway, and there is no continuation of pedestrian access beyond the kerb. Therefore, the key condition for Code 27 – adjacency to a footway, verge, or cycle track – is not met.

2. Vehicle Was Over 1.5 Metres from Any Dropped Kerb

The vehicle was parked at a clear distance of more than 1.5 metres from the nearest dropped kerb. It is therefore not adjacent to the dropped section, and does not meet the proximity criteria for this offence under civil enforcement guidance.

This further confirms that the vehicle was not interfering with access or egress at that location.

3. Dropped Kerb Is Disused and Serves No Purpose

The dropped kerb at the location is a legacy feature from a former road entrance which was closed off more than 15 years ago, as verified by Google Earth satellite imagery:
   •   The 31st December 2020 image shows the original road alignment.
   •   The 1st June 2009 image already shows the area permanently closed off.

The dropped kerb is not linked to any footpath, cycle track, driveway, or access point, and therefore should not be treated as enforceable.

4. No Obstruction Was Caused

The vehicle was parked fully on the carriageway and not obstructing any pedestrian route, cycle access, or driveway. In contrast, other vehicles parked nearby on the actual footpath created far more obstruction but were not penalised. This points to selective or inconsistent enforcement.

5. No Signage or Road Markings Were Present

There are no signs or painted road markings to indicate that this location falls within a restricted or specially enforced area. This creates confusion and leads to a lack of fair notice for drivers.

6. Officer Error in Applying Code 27

It appears the Civil Enforcement Officer misjudged the site and issued the PCN based solely on the presence of a dropped kerb without considering:
   •   The distance of the vehicle from it,
   •   The lack of adjacent footway,
   •   The non-functional nature of the kerb, and
   •   The lack of any restriction indicators.

Conclusion:

Given the above, I kindly request that the PCN be cancelled on the grounds that:
   •   The area is not a Special Enforcement Area,
   •   The vehicle was not adjacent to any functional dropped kerb,
   •   The dropped kerb is non-operational and historic,
   •   The vehicle caused no obstruction,
   •   And no signage or fair notice was provided.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Regards


Also checked on Google Earth historic satellite images and it shows this bit of the road was an entrance to an road more than 15 years ago.

See more images here: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/4eyvt7eape1jmj83335r2/AA5DJtX9RgHiwMpWM0gc65c?rlkey=ddvg2veacs283eisxmifoxpck&dl=0

Thanks!