Free Traffic Legal Advice

IMO, they cannot move your vehicle to another road(as opposed to a place not on a road(the 'pound') unless it has already been issued with a PCN.

But according to you, they did because there's no mention of a PCN issued in Amelia.

And IMO, they cannot move to another place on a road which is itself restricted if prospectively the vehicle would again be in contravention, which is what's alleged here.

IMO, something is missing from this account

Perhaps I've misunderstood, but isn't the OP saying that the TRACE check provided by the police shows that the car was TWOC'd from Amelia Street on 25 September and moved to Crampton Street before the PCNs were issued?  That's the only move the OP is referring to.

ie the PCNs were incurred by the TWOC'ers and not the OP or her husband.

What the OP hasn't explained is when the car was left on Amelia Road (sometimetime on or before 25 September presumably) and why it took until 11 October to report the car as missing to the police...

Hello there,

I am keen to resurrect this thread, as I have my tribunal hearing next week.

I am still of the belief that the roadside sign at the parking bay does not indicate a requirement to pay when an event day is on a weekend. Some people have suggested that it is clear that you must pay when the event day is on a weekend, however they have been unable to explain to me how it is clear. If your opinion is that it is clear there is a requirement to pay on a weekend event day I would love to hear why you say that.

Any advice for the tribunal?

Thanks

FWIW - I'm no expert!    - I would agree with you that if the bottom plate is intended to apply to weekends it is at best ambiguous and at worst misleading.

The top plate only refers to "Mon - Fri 9am to 5pm".

The bottom plate refers to "Event Days only" without stating any days of the week, so I would understand it only to be qualifying the top plate and therefore only applying to the days Monday to Friday.

If it's meant to be imposing an additional restriction covering weekends it should say so - eg "Event days (Mon - Sun) only..."

(I won't comment on whether or not the entry signs to the zone correctly identified the match day in question)

But don't rely on my understanding and support as you'll probably lose!

Quote from: ManxTom on June 11, 2026, 09:27:42 pm

And was 05 March 2026 the date of the parking contravention or the date of issue of the PCN?

You've said both in different posts

Do you not know why Greenwich seem to be convinced that you were RK on the date of the contravention when you say you only became RK wef 07 March 2026, and that that is what the DVLA shows? 

"... The DVLA sent us your details as being the registered keeper of the vehicle on the date of the contravention..."

Yes, 05 March 2026 was the date of the PCN and I bought the car on 07 March 2026, The DVLA sent us your details as being the registered keeper of the vehicle on the date of the contravention I dont understand how this is possible when I bought the car after the PCN was received, I did do a SAR on the car and it shows I was the RK on the 11/01/2026, a whole two months before I even went to see the car. The car was likely in trade, is it possible to place a person as RK even before buying the car if the car is in trade?

Ah... you didn't mention that earlier...  No idea how you would have been showing as RK nearly three months before you bought it?

You had no earlier connection to the car?

What was the date of the contravention?

And when will your appeal be in front of the adjudicator?

"... The officer then said my insurance was not valid due to minor cosmetic items on my car..."


Sorry but what does this ^ mean?  What did the police say to you about the "minor cosmetic items"?

@fezster  -  "... Should I still submit this, even though it is incorrect?"

Which time do you think is incorrect?  The one on the NIP or the one on the submission form?

Did you at least keep a copy of your reply?

I know that on it's own it isn't conclusive proof that you sent it back, but if it shows your signature and the date on it then it's another piece of evidence tending to show that you sent the form back in good faith.

Why complete and sign the form and take a copy of it if you weren't sending it back?

(I know it could be argued that you took a copy and then binned it and that you were taking the risk that the police would somehow miss the failure to identify and wouldn't prosecute you, but i think you'd have to be remarkably stupid and dishonest to run that risk.  Mind you there seem to be a lot of remarkably stupid and dishonest people out there...)

Thanks for everyone’s advice. I sent the letters back pleading guilty for the speeding and not guilty for the s172... It’s made me even doubt that I’ve filled in letter correctly. ...

Did you not keep a copy of the plea you sent back?

So did this form they sent you a link to not have anything to identify it by?

Like a name or a title...?