Free Traffic Legal Advice

I've submitted a formal appeal, I may pay this but just want to see if they'll let on if I have any room to appeal at tribunals.
I sent the following:


Hello,

I am writing to formally challenge the issuance of this PCN on the basis of procedural irregularity and non-compliance with statutory guidance concerning the enforcement of moving traffic contraventions.

The camera used in this instance was installed under the Healthy School Streets (HSS) initiative, a scheme which was publicly introduced as targeting traffic during specified school-related hours. At no stage was it communicated to residents that this camera would be used to enforce additional moving traffic contraventions (MTCs), such as one-way restrictions, beyond the original purpose of the scheme.

It is critical that enforcement measures - particularly those involving automated surveillance and civil penalties — are introduced transparently and lawfully. In this case this includes:
• Clearly informing the public when a camera’s enforcement scope is being expanded
• Ensuring the use of the device aligns with the requirements set out in the Traffic Management Act 2004
• Adhering to the Department for Transport’s statutory guidance on the roll-out of MTC enforcement, including the use of a six-month warning notice period for first-time contraventions at newly enforced camera sites - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/bus-lane-and-moving-traffic-enforcement-outside-london/traffic-management-act-2004-statutory-guidance-for-local-authorities-outside-london-on-civil-enforcement-of-bus-lane-and-moving-traffic-contravention?utm_source=chatgpt.com

In this case:
• The camera enforcement at this location began on or around 1 March 2025
• I received a PCN on 13th October 2025 without any prior warning or notification
• There was no indication, signage, or correspondence to suggest that this camera was now being used to enforce MTCs such as a one-way restriction
• The Council has not, to my knowledge, provided public notice of the transition from Healthy School Streets-only enforcement to general MTC enforcement at this site

I am requesting:
1. Confirmation that the Council formally notified the public that the HSS-installed camera would be used for MTC enforcement, along with the evidence of such notices
2. Evidence that a warning notice period was observed in accordance with DfT guidance, Newham council has a tendency to prosecute first and ask questions later.
3. Clarification on whether the Council considers enforcement without such warning — using a camera publicly designated for a separate scheme — to be consistent with its duties under the Traffic Management Act 2004

The absence of clear public communication and proper warning undermines the legitimacy of this enforcement action. I respectfully request that the PCN be cancelled and await a formal response to the points raised above.

Please do address my points along with evidence that would allow me to judge this PCN as lawful, otherwise I as I often do where there is ambiguity I will take this to London Tribunals, as Newham Council does not have a good track record of being fair to its motorists.

Kind regards,

I received a CC but pushed back to Newham Council that they did not issue me the NOR letter in response to my appeal. After some emails back and forth they sent me the correspondence via email.
When I got the NOR letter by email and the web code for Tribunals, Tribunals said I was out of the date and could not appeal. I explained to them my council did not send me the NOR with the web code in an appropriate time, and considering the circumstances they allowed me to open an appeal.
So I was the one who referred this to an adjudicator, by explaining the I never received my NOR and could not have been expected to appeal or even pay.

So the large gap in date is that I since I didn't hear from them and received no NOR I thought I was clear, till I got the CC and the above transpired.



The evidence they posted for the CPZ: https://ibb.co/b5HD8w8N

Thanks stamfordman, I will likely pay this one as I already am at the tribunals stage for one of them.
I dont think I can take the stress of one tribunal right after another 

I am considering challenging on the basis that the camera was introduced for healthy school streets, but is now being used for MTC.
I do not see Stafford Road on here and the cameras were put up circa 3 months ago only: https://www.newham.gov.uk/transport-streets/moving-traffic-contraventions/2

I have a prepared speech - given it is via video call I will read off it.
The core of it is:

Newham Council states they had sent me a notice of rejection of my formal appeal. I never received this letter, and was issued a charge notice with the threat of debt collection, I explained the situation and it took a great deal of effort and a greater number of emails still to get the notice of rejection from them so I could lodge this complaint.

I would like to start my case by first explaining how the decision to park in front of the school formed, including the reasoning and logic I applied in the moment, as would any motorist. Following it up with a rebuttal of some of the councils points they have outlined as part of their appeal. Lastly I would like to close with a an anecdote of similar case that shows a pattern of neglectful signage on the councils behalf but a willingness to prosecute their residents nonetheless.

I would like to start my case by first explaining how the decision to park in front of the school formed, including the reasoning and logic I applied in the moment, as would any motorist. Following it up with a rebuttal of some of the councils points they have outlined as part of their appeal. Lastly I would like to close with a an anecdote of similar case that shows a pattern of neglectful signage on the councils behalf but a willingness to prosecute their residents nonetheless.

The alleged contravention occurred when I parked the vehicle in question on a Friday night. Understanding that I am parked outside of a school and that a yellow line means some restrictions; as the council has kindly pointed out in their appeal “The very purpose of a single yellow line is to draw the attention of the driver to the existence of a parking restriction.” 
So, to follow the rules, I looked for a sign and observed that the nearest signage, less than a meter from where I was parked, right above the yellow line, indicated the restrictions apply from Monday-Friday, meaning parking was within the rules on a Saturday. So, based on the sign, I believed I was parking legally on Saturday and that is why I’m contesting this ticket.

The council states that the Controlled Parking Zone would be in effect even on a Saturday. But here’s where their logic doesn’t add up and the council has created real confusion - and it is their responsibility to correct that.

The CPZ is in effect Monday - Saturday 8am - 6:30pm. This time already contains the times of the school signage Monday - Friday 8am - 5pm. Monday - Saturday 8am - 6:30pm would cover the times Monday - Friday 8am - 5pm. The school sign would be redundant and moreover pointless, and therefore the Newham councils responsibility to remove it if the CPZ also enforces the area outside of the school.

But because it exists on my road within the CPZ, a motorist will and has operated under logical decision that “the CPZ is for the resident bays and this restrictions for this yellow line are governed by this school signpost”.
The key point I’m making is: if the CPZ applies to this yellow line, the school sign is misleading and should be updated- its presence creates a reasonable expectation that its times govern this part of the road.

Council: Newham
Contravention: Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours.
Location: Stafford Road E7

Situation:

I parked on a Friday night outside a school. There is a single yellow line and school zigzags sharing the same road space (the single yellow trails a bit longer at one end), with one sign directly above them that states Mon–Fri school restriction hours.

Since it was Saturday, I reasonably believed parking was allowed. No separate yellow-line timeplate existed at the location. Newham claim the CPZ hours overrule the visible sign, but they placed a school sign directly over the same markings, creating confusion. The time for the sign is also covered already by the CPZ, so it feels redundant and a point of genuine confusion for me as a motorist.

I'm hoping to fight it on the basis that:
- The school sign and yellow line occupy the same space
- The only visible sign stated Mon–Fri, and that the hours on the sign are already within the cpz sign.
- The CPZ sign was not adjacent to that location
- The council’s reasoning forces drivers to ignore the sign in front of them, which is not realistic or lawful

As this is going to tribunals I have also got the pack from Newham Council that they will use as arguments which I will upload as a link.

I'm also hoping that the tribunals will side with me as I previously won another Newham appeal where unclear Loading Bay markings were repainted only after the tribunal decision. There is a pattern of the borough enforcing before fixing signage rather than ensuring clarity from the start.

Links:
Complete Correspondence: https://ibb.co/fYjbZ99H
Council's Evidence and Ticket: https://ibb.co/yn4jvjMH
Councils Case: https://ibb.co/6cpXFFGT
School Sign: https://ibb.co/tPm0ztJb
School Sign with ZigZag: https://ibb.co/RkwX7xT6
Evidence of Standard of Signage: https://ibb.co/NHbTtgC