Free Traffic Legal Advice

What did you finally submit?

I sent the following..

I make representations against this PCN on the ground that the contravention did not occur.

The prohibition in law applies only where a vehicle is parked on the carriageway more than 50cm from its edge. The CEO’s photographs and the current traffic order (see attached) show that my vehicle was not on the carriageway but on the paved hard-standing (footway) beyond it, the edge of the carriageway being clearly defined by the raised setts/kerbstones. On that basis, the statutory conditions for this contravention were not met.

In the alternative, even if the authority were to assert that the paved area is part of the carriageway, the vehicle was stationary for less than two minutes solely for unloading purposes. Loading and unloading is a recognised statutory exemption, and the stop was both brief and necessary.

For these reasons, the contravention alleged did not occur and the PCN should be cancelled.

And attached this image..
[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

@Incandescent

Thank you, that makes sense. Would you say going with my last draft would be ok then to cover both arguments?

Derek sent me a Kingston case a few days ago @ Kingston Road - similar size and I have all the 19 cases allowed.

@Hippocrates Sorry, I'm not sure what this means.

Should I challenge the PCN on the ground that the alleged contravention did not occur or that I was unloading?

Any advise would be much appreciate as I have to file the appeal before midnight.

Thanks!

IMO this has nothing to do with parcels and everything to do with:

@H C Andersen Thank you, this is very interesting. I guess it comes down to whether the paved land is private or highway land (carriageway, footway, verge). Or is that irrelevant?

Below is a draft for the appeal. Would this be ok to send or should I add more detail?


I wish to challenge this PCN on the ground that the contravention did not occur.

The relevant prohibition applies only where a vehicle is parked on the carriageway. The CEO’s own photographs show that my vehicle was not on the carriageway, but on the paved hard-standing beyond the clear edge of the carriageway (defined by the raised setts / kerbstones).

Dear @Hippocrates, would you be able to offer any advice on this matter?

My deadline to appeal is on Monday.

Many thanks!

It's Mr, and no, I have never been to this location, and hope never to have to drive and park in London. Problem with London is it hasn't enough roadspace to take all the vehicles that want to park. It seems that there must be a permanent fleet of vehicles in motion trying to find a space, a bit like Musical Chairs.
[/quote]

Yes, it really is and if it weren't for the kids I would probably not bother driving in London anymore. It really is no fun driving anywhere in London anymore.

I didn't park in a bay because none were available but also because I have used that same spot for over a decade without ever getting a ticket there.

> as you were doing commercial deliveries so have to move on quickly to the next delivery.
Sorry if this wasn't clear, this was not a commercial delivery. I simply returned an Amazon package at the corner shop which just required dropping off. Should I add a screenshot of the Amazon return label to the appeal?

> you should be aware that 'drive-aways' were given a new process in the Traffic Management Act 2004 whereby if a CEO is preparing a PCN but the driver drove off before it could be served, they can serve a postal PCN.
Thank you, that is good to know. I didn't actually know if the CEO had already started taking pictures or not but I assume if there are no pictures then there is no proof, right?

Hi, I'm looking for advice to appeal this PCN with code 26. Car was parked on a hard-standing which has been used for parking by driver for at least 10 years and a small no parking sign was only recently added (but was there during the event). Does code 26 even apply here?



Vehicle was stationary for less than two minutes while driver was dropping off a package. When driver returned to car the traffic warden had started taking pictures but had not placed a PCN on the vehicle yet (not sure if this is relevant). The car can be seen driving off on the last picture. PCN was received by post today.





Google maps does not yet show the sign and satellite pics show that this spot has been used for parking.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/a1EzV1SfzoAsmb497


I've drafted the following appeal. What are my chances?


Dear Sir/Madam,

Re: PCN [Reference], Vehicle [Registration], The Green N21

I wish to challenge the above PCN on the ground that no contravention occurred.

On the date in question, my vehicle was stationary for under two minutes solely to unload goods. The Traffic Management Act 2004, Schedule 7 provides that the “double parking” prohibition (code 26) does not apply when a vehicle is stopped for the purpose of loading/unloading, provided the activity is continuous and necessary – which was the case here.

Furthermore, the stop was extremely brief and caused no obstruction. The principle of de minimis applies – a momentary unloading stop is too trivial to justify enforcement.

In addition, the hard-standing opposite 32–34 The Green has been openly used for parking and loading for over a decade without restriction. Only very recently has a small “No Parking” sign been erected. In the absence of clear markings or prior warning, drivers had a legitimate expectation that unloading there was permitted. Sudden enforcement without adequate notice is unfair and contrary to the principles of clear signage and consistent enforcement under the TMA 2004.

For these reasons – (1) statutory unloading exemption, (2) trivial duration, and (3) inadequate notice/legitimate expectation – I respectfully request cancellation of this PCN.

Appendix – Supporting Evidence for PCN Appeal (Code 26, The Green N21)

1. Location History (Opposite 32–34 The Green, Enfield N21 1AY)

This hard-standing area has been used as an informal parking/loading spot by residents and delivery drivers for over ten years.

Until very recently, there was no restriction signage or road markings indicating that stopping was prohibited.

2. Street View Evidence (Prior to PCN date)

Google Street View, September 2024:

Images show cars parked at the same location with no “No Parking” sign visible.

Confirms that the location was treated as a normal stopping/parking place until very recently.

(Insert Street View screenshots with captions, e.g. “Figure 1 – Sept 2024, no signage present.”)

3. Council’s PCN Evidence (August 2025)

Enforcement photos (provided with the PCN) now show a new, small “No Parking” sign installed at the site.

This demonstrates the restriction was only introduced recently, without sufficient prior notice to motorists.

(Insert PCN images with sign circled, e.g. “Figure 2 – Aug 2025, small sign newly added.”)

4. Legitimate Expectation

Drivers developed a legitimate expectation that parking/unloading here was permitted, based on more than a decade of unrestricted use.

A sudden change, signposted only by a single small sign, is inadequate to overturn long-standing practice without warning.

5. Summary

Street View (Sept 2024): No signage, long-standing use.

PCN Photos (Aug 2025): New sign appears for the first time.

This supports the argument that signage was recently added and not clearly communicated, making enforcement unfair.