DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 130004--------------------------------------------------
Re: Purley- TFL-PCN 46: Stopped where prohibited, O/S 9-11
Russell parade, Purley,
DIR By: MrChips
Date: September 9, 2026, 2:54 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You were parked outside the Oregano Pizzeria, which (according
to Royal Mail postcode checker) has an official address as
follows:
The Oregano Pizzeria
10 Russell Parade
Russell Hill Road
Purley
CR8 2LE
Your PCN states the location as 9-11 Russell Parade Purley Road
CR8.
In my view, the location on your PCN is incorrect as there is no
Russell Parade on Purley Road. Could an adjudicator rule that
it's clear and unambiguous enough? Potentially yes.
It would probably help your case to show where Purley Road is
(i.e. it's a distinct road which is a fair distance away).
Also, some examples of similar persuasive decisions where the
appeal has been successful on the basis of a location which is
close but not correct.
Here's one such which came to mind:
Case reference
Appellant
Authority
VRM
PCN Details
PCN
Contravention date
Contravention time
Contravention location
Penalty amount
Contravention
Referral date
Decision Date
Adjudicator
Appeal decision
Direction
Notice.
Reasons
The Appellant attended a Personal Appeal Hearing before me
today, 22nd July 2023, to explain his contention personally.
1. The Enforcement Authority assert that the said vehicle
entered and stopped on a location subject to an operative
restriction denoted by yellow cross-hatching, such demarcation
indicating a prohibition against a vehicle remaining stationary
within the defined area due to the presence of stationary
vehicles.
2. The Appellant denies liability for the ensuing Penalty Charge
Notice on the basis of the prevailing circumstances and
challenges as comprehensively stated in his detailed written
representations, which he reiterated at, and supported with
photographic capture which he bought to, the Hearing.
3. The Enforcement Authority who assert that the said vehicle
was so driven contrary to the operative restriction are obliged
to adduce evidence to the requisite standard to substantiate
that assertion:-
The evidence upon which the Enforcement Authority rely comprises
the certified copy Penalty Charge Notice together with
photographic evidence: CCTV footage and still frames taken
there-from revealing the said vehicle in situ and the applicable
carriageway markings notifying motorists of the prohibition.
It is incumbent upon a motorist to be acquainted with [by
reference to The Highway Code], and comply with, such
prohibitions.
4.The prohibition, as set out in The Traffic Signs Regulations &
General Directions 2016 prohibits vehicles (or parts there-of)
from becoming stationary or stopping within the cross-hatched
area due to the presence of stationary vehicles.
There is no requirement that the vehicle be causing an
obstruction.
There is no minimum period since a vehicle is in contravention
immediately it is stationary.
There is no minimum portion of a vehicle since any stationary
part thereof is subject to contravention.
5. The contemporaneous photographic capture was examined
(repeatedly) to evaluate the allegation in conjunction with the
Appellant's representations and images.
6. The Appellant raised 6 issues in his Notice of Appeal, some
of which were addressed by the Enforcement Authority in its Case
Summary, and all of which were discussed at the Hearing. Since
this is a matter of 'strict liability' although I have
considered each of the Appellant's contentions, for the
most-part they cannot impact on my determination.
However I register concern on reading the minutes of the
Enforcement Authority's meeting of the Environment and Community
Services Policy Development and Scrutiny Committee of Wednesday
9th September 2020, bought to my attention by the Appellant,
which suggests revenue impacts on the siting of camera
enforcement locations.
7. Whilst the evidence substantiates a contravention, I cannot
be satisfied that the contravention as alleged in the Penalty
Charge Notice is made out. The Appellant's pertinent point
contends that the said vehicle was not at the location stated on
the Penalty Charge Notice as such location does not exist; to
identify the location the Appellant obtained the address of
Bromley Police Station and provided Google Earth aerial images
of the location which description corresponds with the Police
Station address; namely a junction between an un-named access
road and High Street, Bromley, Kent.
8. I therefore consulted the Master London Street Atlas and
could find no entry for 'High St Bromley Sth.'
On balance, evidentially I cannot be satisfied that this
contravention occurred, accordingly I allow this Appeal.
And here's another case at the same location where a different
adjudicator agreed the inclusion of the word "South" in the
location meant it was sufficiently different from the true
location to be unenforceable.
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XdV0Z3MNrFFdUnrv04G_WngsMj-jSgKu/view
#Post#: 130012--------------------------------------------------
Re: Purley- TFL-PCN 46: Stopped where prohibited, O/S 9-11
Russell parade, Purley,
DIR By: tincombe
Date: September 9, 2026, 3:58 am
---------------------------------------------------------
OP, can you think of any reason why your NOR took so long to
arrive? Were you not at home, is there a difference in the
addresses, are you actually the registered keeper and addressee?
Anyway, taking MrChips's approach, the shops variously describe
themselves as Russell Hill Parade, Russell Road and Russell Hill
Parade; Russell Hill etc.
The PCN says Russell Rd, Purley Rd.
Russell Road exists and is used as an address in various
combinations.
On its own I'm not certain that it's a winner.
But the procedural improprieties are obvious.
The NOR fails to notify you of your mandated rights of appeal.
It is the only document prescribed for this purpose, and it
doesn't. It is also confusing.
If it were me, I would also add failure to consider your reps.
Although you did not keep a copy of your these, TfL helpfully
pulled out the point regarding addresses in their reply. The
alpha and omega of their response was: we're right and you're
wrong. No reasoning, no references to sources, just gainsaying
your argument.
Discount ends tomorrow.
#Post#: 130019--------------------------------------------------
Re: Purley- TFL-PCN 46: Stopped where prohibited, O/S 9-11
Russell parade, Purley,
DIR By: vjs
Date: September 9, 2026, 5:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: tincombe link ---
>
> OP, can you think of any reason why your NOR took so long to
arrive? Were you not at home, is there a difference in the
addresses, are you actually the registered keeper and addressee?
>
> Anyway, taking MrChips's approach, the shops variously
describe themselves as Russell Hill Parade, Russell Road and
Russell Hill Parade; Russell Hill etc.
>
> The PCN says Russell Rd, Purley Rd.
>
> Russell Road exists and is used as an address in various
combinations.
>
> On its own I'm not certain that it's a winner.
>
> But the procedural improprieties are obvious.
>
> The NOR fails to notify you of your mandated rights of appeal.
It is the only document prescribed for this purpose, and it
doesn't. It is also confusing.
>
> If it were me, I would also add failure to consider your reps.
Although you did not keep a copy of your these, TfL helpfully
pulled out the point regarding addresses in their reply. The
alpha and omega of their response was: we're right and you're
wrong. No reasoning, no references to sources, just gainsaying
your argument.
> .
>
>
> Discount ends tomorrow.
>
--- End Quote ---
I can only think it was the bank holiday weekend that delayed it
and nothing else. Previous letters did not face such delay.
Address is correct and RK is my spouse.
I may need help highlighting the procedural impropriety as I'm a
novice and it's not very obvious to me being my first PCN from
TFL.
I'm planning to take some pictures from the street tomorrow to
create an evidence pack
#Post#: 130020--------------------------------------------------
Re: Purley- TFL-PCN 46: Stopped where prohibited, O/S 9-11
Russell parade, Purley,
DIR By: MrChips
Date: September 9, 2026, 5:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I did look at the addresses listed for the various shops from a
google search and found a degree of inconsistency (in line with
Tincombe's findings) - hence my reference to Royal Mail for a
decisive view of what the true address should be. Crucially,
however, none detail themselves as being on Purley Road.
#Post#: 130022--------------------------------------------------
Re: Purley- TFL-PCN 46: Stopped where prohibited, O/S 9-11
Russell parade, Purley,
DIR By: tincombe
Date: September 9, 2026, 5:38 am
---------------------------------------------------------
We can help your wife compile an appeal both in highlight terms
when registered and in detail when it comes to a hearing(which
would be online or by telephone). But only she can decide
whether to appeal.
#Post#: 130024--------------------------------------------------
Re: Purley- TFL-PCN 46: Stopped where prohibited, O/S 9-11
Russell parade, Purley,
DIR By: vjs
Date: September 9, 2026, 6:07 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you tincombe, do you suggest to get a signed document from
her authorising to represent? She is not very familiar with the
procedure and has asked me to help frame the appeal. I will be
reviewing this with her before filing it.
#Post#: 130032--------------------------------------------------
Re: Purley- TFL-PCN 46: Stopped where prohibited, O/S 9-11
Russell parade, Purley,
DIR By: tincombe
Date: September 9, 2026, 8:34 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Appeals are held online or by phone. In either case, as I
understand it the registered keeper must be in attendance
although another party may present the appeal. In which case,
written authority isn't required: they can simply introduce you
as their husband.
This is a two-step process: first register an appeal; then
develop your arguments by submitting further representations.
IMO, as much of your appeal arises from post-formal reps issues,
which of course won't be found in the reps themselves, then the
authority won't be aware of their substance. IMO, when
registering you should flag up the important aspects of the PIs
to give the authority time to consider and rebut in their
evidence.
When we go into detail you'll need to deal with a 'what if'
scenario because the authority would probably rely upon this, so
we'll shoot it down beforehand. I'm referring to their enclosure
i.e. the Tribunal's information leaflet. IMO, this does not form
part of the NOR. But..
If it does, then the NOR is not only defective, it's
contradictory as well;
If it doesn't, then the NOR is 'only' defective!;
But at this stage her decision is whether to carry on or not. An
appeal is against the full penalty.
#Post#: 130117--------------------------------------------------
Re: Purley- TFL-PCN 46: Stopped where prohibited, O/S 9-11
Russell parade, Purley,
DIR By: vjs
Date: September 10, 2026, 2:00 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you all, having discussed the facts and the likely
outcome, Mrs isn't ready to risk a £160 fine even though she
thinks we have a good chance to win. Will have to take this as a
lesson and be more careful in the future.
I learned a lot from the moderators and senior members here and
personally I would have liked to carry on, however have to
respect the decision of the RK.
Thank you all for your guidance and support this far.
*****************************************************
Page 4 of 4
DIR Previous Page