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 - 11235813sk

Pages: [1]
1
Yes, you have a chance.  However, it's not a frequently used argument and so I don't have much data to predict where probability of success lies on a scale of 0% to 100%.

Here's a couple of examples of where it's been successful in the past (also Redbridge box junctions) - quoting these may also boost your chances.  However, I'd be lying if I said it's a slam dunk - you may get an adjudicator who refuses to engage with it as a line of argument.

Case Details
Case reference  223033552A
Appellant  Janice Flint
Authority  London Borough of Redbridge
VRM  FV65SVZ
PCN Details
PCN  AF97410735
Contravention date  19 Jun 2023
Contravention time  13:46:00
Contravention location  Goodmayes Road
Penalty amount  GBP 130.00
Contravention  Entering and stopping in a box junction
Referral date 
Decision Date  17 Aug 2023
Adjudicator  Edward Houghton
Appeal decision  Appeal allowed
Direction  cancel the Penalty Charge Notice.
Reasons 
The Appellant was represented by Mr Dishman. The grounds of Appeal are set out in Mr Dishman’s skeleton argument which he developed before me. Having considered the matter carefully it seems to me that at least one of the grounds of appeal has some merit. The location is described as Goodmayes Road; however Mr Dishman tells me, and I accept, that there are three box junctions in Goodmayes Road. |The PCN is required to set out the grounds on which a penalty is demanded, and this inevitably includes a clear statement of the location of the alleged contravention. Although it might be possible for a motorist to trace the location from the photographs with some effort the Council’s prior duty is to set it out clearly. There seems to me no good reason why the location could not simply be stated as Goodmayes road junction with (naming the adjacent road) as would routinely be done in the case of a road traffic summons in the Magistrates Court. As the PCN was defective no penalty may be demanded on the basis of it and the Appeal ids allowed

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Case Details
Case reference 2230201115
Appellant Sandra Grauzyte
Authority London Borough of Redbridge
VRM VA16 OYG
PCN Details
PCN AF97065295
Contravention date 01 Mar 2023
Contravention time 16:07:00
Contravention location Goodmayes Road
Penalty amount GBP 130.00
Contravention Entering and stopping in a box junction
Referral date -
Decision Date 31 May 2023
Adjudicator Andrew Harman
Appeal decision Appeal allowed
Direction cancel the Penalty Charge Notice.
Reasons Mr Murray-Smith, for the appellant, appeared before me today via telephone.

I was satisfied for the reason he gave in his skeleton argument uploaded to the case on 10/05/23 - the council not responding to what was said it appearing to have had a full opportunity to do so - that the PCN was insufficiently particularised as to the location of the incident to the potential prejudice of the appellant in establishing where it had occurred it thus not being fully compliant. The contravention had not therefore been proved. The appeal was accordingly allowed.
I can give a shot, but if council rejects appeal do i still get a chance to pay 80£ or I have to pay the whole 160£?

Can you share me what I should put in my appeal

2
I can give a shot, but if council rejects appeal do i still get a chance to pay 80£ or I have to pay the whole 160£?

Can you share me what I should put in my appeal

3
Do i have chance if i appeal on this factor?

4
Hi All, hope all is well.

YBJ on Ilford Lane.
My bad of being absent minded with a crying toddler on back seat.

Do I have a leg to stand.


PCN No: AF21770289
REG: HT19FBN



Drive Link

6
FORMAL REPRESENTATION AGAINST PENALTY CHARGE NOTICE
I am writing to formally contest the above Penalty Charge Notice issued on 23/07/2025 for an alleged contravention of Code 53J - "Failing to comply with a restriction on vehicles entering a pedestrian zone" at High Street North E6 / Skeffington Road E6 at 16:38 on 11/07/2025.
GROUNDS FOR REPRESENTATION
Ground 1: Collateral Challenge - PCN Fails to State Mandatory Information
I challenge this Penalty Charge Notice on the ground that it is defective and invalid as it fails to comply with the mandatory requirements set out in Section 4(8)(v) of the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003, which states that a penalty charge notice must include:
"the grounds on which the enforcing authority believes that a penalty charge is payable with respect to the vehicle"
Specific Defects:
•   The PCN merely states "camera enforcement" without specifying the legal grounds
•   No reference to the specific Traffic Management Order establishing the restriction
•   No details of the time periods when the restriction applies
•   Fails to specify what specific restriction was allegedly contravened
Legal Authority: Section 4(8)(v) London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003
Ground 2: Collateral Challenge - Contradictory Timeline Information
I make a further collateral challenge as the PCN contains contradictory and conflicting information regarding the deadline for action under the "What should you do?" section:
Specific Contradictions Identified:
1.   Point 1) states: "Make payment before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of this notice"
2.   Point 2) states: "Make representations before the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of service of this notice"
These create two different starting dates for the 28-day period:
•   "Date of this notice" = 23/07/2025
•   "Date of service" = Unknown/different date
This fundamental contradiction creates legal uncertainty and prejudices my statutory rights by making it unclear which deadline applies.
Ground 3: Additional Legal Defect - Inadequate Penalty Information
The PCN states the penalty as £160.00 but fails to provide clear information about:
•   The statutory basis for this penalty amount
•   Whether this is the correct amount for this specific contravention
•   Clear explanation of the discount structure
Ground 4: Primary Challenge - No Contravention Occurred
I challenge this penalty on the substantive ground that no contravention occurred due to:
a) Absence of Advanced Warning Signage
•   There was no adequate advance warning signage visible from my direction of approach
•   The location contains excessive and confusing signage making it impossible to identify the specific pedestrian zone restriction
•   This fails to meet Department for Transport guidelines for proper traffic signage
b) Exceptional Circumstances
•   At the time of the alleged contravention, I was driving with a distressed infant passenger requiring my attention for safety reasons
•   Combined with inadequate signage, it was impossible to identify any restriction
c) Request for Evidence I request the council provide:
•   Copies of all relevant Traffic Management Orders
•   Photographic evidence of signage from all approach directions
•   Evidence of compliance with statutory signage requirements
•   Details of the specific time restrictions that apply
CONCLUSION
I respectfully submit that this Penalty Charge Notice should be cancelled immediately on the following grounds:
1.   The PCN is legally defective and fails to comply with mandatory requirements under Section 4(8)(v) of the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003
2.   The PCN contains contradictory deadline information creating fundamental legal uncertainty about statutory timeframes
3.   Additional legal defects regarding penalty information and statutory basis
4.   No contravention occurred due to inadequate signage and exceptional circumstances


7
Thank you for all the help. I have drafted the attached refresentation with the help of ChatGPT.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

8
Hi All,

I accidentally drove into this zone. It was very sudden , I was following the road with a infant in my back seat and completely mind occupied as the baby was crying. And now I regret it, charge of 80£ is alot for me now.

Can you please let me know if anything can be done with this ticket.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Pages: [1]