Free Traffic Legal Advice

Just send that template. The contents of the initial appeal aren't particularly important - Civil Enforcement will reject either way. It is at POPLA where arguments can be fleshed out in detail.

The important thing is to get the appeals submitted - we're now 60 posts in on this thread and this still hasn't happened. Remember, if there is more than 1 PCN, each needs appealing separately.

An email response arrived on April 25th, but for only one of the PCNs, attached.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

afternoon, so to summarise:

1) One of my PCNs has been cancelled according to CE website
2) I have had a response for only one of the remaining 2

Just would like some advice as to my next steps, in terms of next appeal stage, and whether I should contact CE to chase on their response to the other PCN.
thanks

SO you appeal to POPLA for the other outstanding PCNs. Each PCN has to be appealed separately. Have a search of the forum for other POPLA appeals to see how and what you should include in a POPLA appeal.

When you think you have something ready to use, show it to us and someone will review it and let you know whether to send as is or to make corrections/additions.

Just remember that POPLA will only consider points of law or the PPSCoP. They do not consider any mitigation.

You have 33 days from the date of the appeal rejection to submit your POPLA appeal.

If a response is now overdue, yes.

Yes, we're waiting for you to share a draft for us to comment on - we are unfortunately unable to write an entire POPLA appeal for you as this is a very busy forum run by volunteers.

You mentioned having sent an FOI request on 16th April - what response have you had?

Draft first attempt at an appeal....

The denial of the appeal by CE stated 28 days not 33 days as someone has suggested, which would mean that I have until 23rd May to submit. They have confirmed that the 2 later PCNs have been cancelled.

I am appealing against the issue of PCN 0943640437 issued on 23rd March 2025. From a personal perspective, I was taken into the adjoining Southmead Hospital with a suspected heart attack and with the necessity of obtaining treatment being priorty, she decided to park at the leisure centre gym, where I have been a member for 20 years, rather than having to walk further using the hospital's main car park (A&E parking spaces were fully used). Due to the concern about my health, the stay in the car park was longer than the 3 hours specified in the sign dotted around the site. I would like to add that the PCNs state that £70 will be added at a later date, whereas the signs merely say that a nebulous 'additional charge' will be incurred. Acceptance of an offer in contract law requires the offer, and the acceptance of the offer, to be unequivocal - commonly used as the mirror image rule (Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co).

All help welcomed.

I don't think there are clear points of law to support me then. The cases quoted before offer alternative opinions so none the wiser as to the approach I should take