Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hello all,

I'm at a decision point: pay £80 now (discount period ends 20 March) or proceed to formal representation and adjudication. I believe I have a reasonable case but want experienced eyes before committing. Full details and photographs below.

---

**PCN details**
- Authority: Haringey Council
- PCN number: ZN20147713
- Contravention date: 06 February 2026 (Friday), 10:46
- Location: Craven Park Road, STH TOT (ST) CPZ
- Vehicle: LA61DHX
- Contravention: Parked in a permit holders only bay without a valid permit
- Penalty: £160 full / £80 discount (expires 20 March 2026)

---

**Background**

The bay is signed "Permit holders only, Mon–Fri, 10am–Noon" (time plate at nos. 42 & 44 per the Council's letter). The CEO observed the vehicle for 8 minutes and 8 seconds (stated period: 10:37–10:46) before issuing the PCN. I did not hold a resident's permit for this zone.

---

**Informal challenge — grounds raised**

1. The CEO's photographs of the restriction sign were blurred and entirely illegible — insufficient to prove a compliant sign was visible at the material time (Reg. 18, LA Traffic Orders Procedure Regs 1996).
2. Internal inconsistency: stated observation period is 10:37–10:46, yet all photographs are timestamped 10:46–10:47 only.
3. Of approximately 20 CEO photographs, not one clearly shows the restriction sign.

---

**Council's rejection (25 February 2026)**

- Signage said to be compliant with TSRGD 2016.
- On the timing point, the Council responded: "The time-stamped on the photos taken does not invalid this PCN, because the vehicle was parked illegally" — which does not address the inconsistency raised.
- CEO observed vehicle for 8 mins 8 secs, no driver seen, no loading/unloading.

---

**The key issue — photographs**


Every one of the CEO's authenticated photographs carries a standard red timestamp overlay: "2026/02/06 10:46 / Craven Park Road, STH TOT (ST) CPZ". The sign photograph included in the rejection letter has no timestamp overlay, no date, and no location reference — and the only CEO photograph that attempts to show the sign is blurred and entirely illegible.

The Council has introduced an undated, unauthenticated sign photograph at the rejection stage that was not part of the original CEO evidence pack, without disclosing its source or provenance.

**Weather corroboration:**
Weather records for Tottenham on 6 February 2026 confirm overcast, grey and rainy conditions throughout the morning — consistent with all CEO photographs, which show dull, wet conditions. The sign photograph in the rejection letter depicts bright sunshine with sharp, clearly visible shadows: conditions that were not present on the date of the contravention. This suggests the photograph was taken on a different day entirely and confirms it is not original CEO evidence.

---

**My question**

I'm weighing two options:

**Option A — Pay £80 now.** Safe, certain, closes the matter.

**Option B — Proceed to formal representation and if rejected, appeal to London Tribunals.** If successful, the PCN is cancelled entirely.

Do you think the signage evidence point is strong enough to take to an adjudicator? And has anyone seen cases where a council has introduced Street View-type imagery at the rejection stage and how adjudicators have treated that?

Thank you.

Link for the photo and rejection letter.
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1UGYB1npp_cLv3wZke0sbzf1vn6XJT5he?usp=sharing

Ling for google street view.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/HbubUUJwDmVhEqEa7

Best to let her know what she needs to do, or she'll have bailiffs on her in a few weeks.

Oh blimey, it was sent to her. That'll be a laugh, we are in the process of breaking up and selling the house

Was the original notice sent to you or your gf? If it's her hame then she will have to deal with it. You can deal with it if she gives you permission to do so.

If the council have sent an information pack, does it have a photo of a little yellow sign at the bus stop that says "No Stopping Except Buses"?  That gives the car driver a clue as to not what to do and there's usually an associated camera watching you. If that photo is missing or the sign isn't there, that can be a good point of appeal.

Assuming your bus lane PCN was served under the Transport Management Act 2004, you should have received a Form TE9 Witness Statement included in the envelope containing the Order for Recovery.  Please tell us if you received this form. If not, you can download it from the TEC website: -

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/form-te9-dart-charge-mersey-gateway-clear-air-zones-challenge-a-traffic-enforcement-order

TEC seem to not know that this form covers PCNs served under the Traffic Management Act 2004 !! One would think a government body which is part of the Ministry of Justice would know, but there you are.