Free Traffic Legal Advice

Your message did make me laugh! The rely just did not seem conventional in the slightest. Not sure what’s going on. Ok - I’ll wait! Will you keep you posted on the next piece of correspondence.

Thank Hippocrates - I will make the changes as suggested and get it sent off. Will keep you updated on their response….have a lovely rest of the sunny weekend :-)

Thank you Hippocrates for your amendments. I will Adjust and repost today.

Evening Hippocrates, am I good to send this off to challenge the PCN? Or am I to hold on till the information regarding the authorisation is received from the council?

I am appealing the PCN on the following grounds:

1. Inadequate or Missing Signage – No Evidence of Contravention
The video evidence provided does not show any traffic signs that I allegedly passed which would indicate a contravention. Without clear and visible signage, I could not have been reasonably aware that a restriction was in place. According to the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions (TSRGD), traffic signs must be clearly visible and properly placed for any restriction to be enforceable. The absence of such signs in the footage undermines the basis for the PCN.

2. Procedural Impropriety – Fettering of Discretion
The PCN issued states that the authority “will” issue an Enforcement Notice if payment is not made. This wording is a departure from the mandatory statutory language under the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) General Regulations 2007, which requires the authority to retain discretion at all stages. By indicating a mandatory next step rather than a discretionary one, the PCN unlawfully fetters the authority’s discretion, amounting to procedural impropriety and rendering the notice invalid.

3. De Minimis and Safety Justification – Momentary Bus Lane Entry
The video evidence shows that only a very minor part of the vehicle entered the bus lane, and only momentarily. This was done solely to safely avoid a cyclist, not to gain any advantage or to make material use of the lane. There was no obstruction, no delay to any bus service, and no benefit obtained from the incursion. The movement was clearly incidental and necessary to ensure safety. This minor encroachment falls within the de minimis principle and does not constitute a substantive contravention.

How would you go about finding whether they have authorisation?

Does it make any difference if the line is broken as opposed to a solid white line?

Hi both Cp and Hippocrates,

Unfortunately, I did make the decision to pay. Whilst I think there was a case to put forward at the time, I just didn’t have the fight to see it through. Thank you all for your help & support!

I have put a formal complaint into the council though. Still awaiting a reply - I have had a pcn cancelled that way before. Not holding my breath at all but either way still thought it was important to highlight their failure to consider evidence thoroughly.