Free Traffic Legal Advice

First of all, thank you all for your engagement and for taking the time to help – I really appreciate the advice and support.
TfL’s position is that they have never received my representation. This might be true if their website/representation form malfunctioned on that day, but I don’t think potential IT issues on their side should strengthen their case.

---

I have now received a letter from the tribunal.
I plan to respond and would like to include my wife as a witness.
Could anyone advise what evidence I should provide at this stage and what format the tribunal expects when submitting documents?

I would like to include the following evidence:

• Email confirmation from TfL that two accounts were created
• Email confirmation that Auto Pay was set up
• A screenshot from Messenger showing that I wrote “representation was sent today at 2 pm”, together with the full representation attached in that message

---

Considering all of the above, I still think it would be fair for me to pay the original Congestion Charge fee. Should I suggest this in my written communication to the tribunal, or is it better to raise it during the hearing?

Below is the letter I received from the tribunal.

https://imgpile.com/p/XNKlSJc#Gli96TE
https://imgpile.com/p/XNKlSJc#P2ucMPQ
https://imgpile.com/p/XNKlSJc#LX2NkSC

Hi all,

I would really appreciate some advice regarding a Congestion Charge PCN we received from Transport for London.

The case has now been referred to the independent adjudicator at London Tribunals.
We did not intend to formally challenge the charge; we simply wanted to try our luck and ask for a gesture of goodwill.

PCN: LP34347097
REG: DL67HLE

• Last letter from Congestion Charge: Congestion Charge

---

Timeline:

• In September 2025, the registered keeper received a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) for the Congestion Charge.
• In our representation, we asked for the matter to be considered as a gesture of goodwill and confirmed that we were willing to pay the original Congestion Charge fee for entering the zone.
• Within 2 days, we submitted a representation based on mitigation and discretion (as stated: “If none of the six statutory grounds apply, you may still make a representation explaining your circumstances and we will carefully consider these.”).
• We never received a Notice of Rejection from TfL.
• In December, we received a Statutory Declaration form, which was completed in January and later accepted by the court.
• Now we have received a letter from TfL (dated 20/02, delivered on 2 March) stating:

“We have reviewed your application and the processing of the PCN and have decided we wish to proceed with its enforcement.”[/list]

---

Key details:

• On the same day we submitted the representation, both my partner and I created Congestion Charge accounts.
• I also set up Auto Pay that same day and mentioned this in my representation.
• The representation was submitted via the TfL website.

• Unfortunately, I did not receive an email confirmation after submitting the representation. Because of that, I submitted it a second time to make sure it had gone through. However, I did not receive confirmation for the second submission either. This may indicate there were issues with the TfL website at the time, particularly as TfL now states that they never received any representation from us.

• On the same day, I messaged my partner on Facebook confirming that I had submitted the representation and shared details of it there. I have logs and screenshots available.

---

My questions:

• Would this be sufficient evidence to potentially achieve a positive outcome with the independent adjudicator?
• What evidence should we now provide to the adjudicator?
• How do we properly contact or submit additional information to the adjudicator?
• What outcomes can we realistically expect in this situation?
  
  Could the adjudicator decide that:
  
  We must pay the current £270 charge?
  
  We only need to pay the original £90 PCN amount?
  
  We are allowed to pay just the original Congestion Charge fee for that day?
  
  Or that nothing is payable?
• Also, do we need to clearly state what outcome we are seeking in our appeal (for example, cancellation of the PCN or permission to pay the original Congestion Charge only), or will the adjudicator determine this automatically based on the case?

Any guidance or similar experiences would be greatly appreciated. Please let me know if I should share anything more. Thank you in advance.

Hi All,

Today, a driver parked in a private parking area and received a PCN. At the entrance, there was a large sign on the store window stating that there is free customer parking. Based on the driver’s understanding, it was also possible to park there with a charge if not a customer – this was suggested by point (4) on the sign. The driver was not a customer of the store.


It was unclear from the signage what rules applied to non-customers. The driver believed that parking might be available for a fee and intended to pay at the end of the stay, but this was not explained anywhere.

After only a few minutes, a PCN was issued and left behind the windscreen wiper.

The driver returned to the car about 15 minutes later and moved it outside the parking area. Five minutes after that, the driver called the store owner to clarify why the PCN had been issued, since the driver had been willing to pay for parking. The owner, however, responded rudely and explained that the parking was only for customers, and they had noticed that the driver went to a different store. Owner refused to accept any payment and told that nothing can be done, but only PCN to be paid.

Since the PCN was issued for “Not Authorized” parking rather than for non-payment, the key issue appears to be that the signage did not clearly explain that the parking was strictly for customers only. In fact, point (4) of the Welcome sign creates further confusion, as it implies there are additional terms for non-customers, but these are not clearly defined or displayed.

What would be the best way for the driver to deal with this situation? Should the driver appeal the PCN on the basis of unclear signage, or is there another approach that might be more effective? Or perhaps the driver completely misunderstood the sign and should not have used the parking at all?

Appreciate your help in advance.

Welcome sign: https://ibb.co/Zz4xVbVh
Contractual agreement: https://ibb.co/nsq6hhKQ
Parking site: https://ibb.co/9HT2d5wq
PCN front: https://ibb.co/whYtLjyq
PCN back: https://ibb.co/Zzrbsz04

Issued by: CPS - Combined Parking Solutions.