DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 126522--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge PCN 46n – stopped for around 20 seconds on
Cranbrook Road
DIR By: John_S
Date: August 1, 2026, 4:14 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote ---
> Do you think those points are strong enough to form a proper
appeal, rather than just a request for discretion?
--- End Quote ---
Whatever you say to Redbridge at this stage will almost
certainly be rejected. So the question you need to ask yourself
is, “Am I prepared to take this to adjudication?” IMO you have
good chance of winning an appeal with the arguments that have
already been discussed. So if you are prepared to go to
adjudication, I would put in the simplest of representations to
Redbridge saying: (1) signs could not be read from you angle of
approach; and (2) the signs and markings do not comply with the
Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions. The real
detail can be added later after your appeal application.
#Post#: 126524--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge PCN 46n – stopped for around 20 seconds on
Cranbrook Road
DIR By: ST_2023
Date: August 1, 2026, 4:57 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Here are my reps, please advise if anything needs amending:
I challenge this PCN because the restriction was not adequately
conveyed from my direction of approach, and the council’s own
CCTV shows that I stopped only long enough to ascertain the
restriction and left at the first safe opportunity.
1. The sign was not readable from my direction of approach
The relevant upright sign was twisted away from approaching
traffic. Its wording, permitted activities and operating times.
I could not establish whether the marked area permitted
passenger collection without moving closer. I therefore pulled
into the area briefly for the sole purpose of reading the
restriction. Once close enough to understand the sign, I
immediately realised that the exception operating at 18:53 did
not apply to my vehicle.
2. I left at the earliest safe opportunity. The council’s
complete CCTV footage supports my account and explains the
entire duration of the stop. It shows that my vehicle was
initially at the front of stationary traffic at the lights.
After I pulled into the area, seven vehicles, including a bus,
passed on my right. A pedestrian also walked the full length of
my vehicle immediately alongside the driver’s side in the
carriageway. It would have been unsafe to move while the
pedestrian was directly beside the vehicle or to pull into
passing traffic without a safe gap. I drove away as soon as the
pedestrian had cleared and it was safe to rejoin the
carriageway. No passenger boarded or alighted. I did not remain
after understanding the restriction, and the footage does not
show deliberate waiting or an attempt to collect a passenger.
3. The stop resulted from an inadequately presented restriction.
I did not stop to take advantage of the bay. I stopped because
the sign’s orientation prevented the restriction from being read
from my direction of travel. Having established what the sign
said, I left as soon as reasonably and safely possible. The
council should consider the full CCTV sequence objectively
rather than treating the mere fact that the vehicle became
stationary as conclusive. The footage shows a brief stop to
ascertain an unreadable restriction, followed by departure at
the first safe opportunity.
4. Sign and road-marking compliance. There are also legitimate
concerns about whether the exact combination of signs and
markings complies with the Traffic Signs Regulations and General
Directions 2016. The upright sign combines:
goods-vehicle loading between 6 am and 6 pm; and
taxis between 6 pm and 6 am.
The bay is bounded by white broken markings while double red
lines continue alongside it.
I require the council to identify the precise TSRGD provisions
and permitted variants relied upon for:
the complete upright sign;
the combination of goods-vehicle loading and taxi restrictions
within the same sign assembly;
the white broken bay boundary;
the double red lines alongside the bay; and
the complete arrangement of signs and markings at this location.
If the arrangement is not prescribed, the council should provide
any applicable special authorisation issued by the Secretary of
State. I am not asserting merely that white markings cannot
appear on a red route. The issue is whether this particular sign
and marking arrangement lawfully and clearly conveys the
restrictions created by the relevant Traffic Management Order.
The council’s own evidence shows that the sign was not readable
from my direction of approach;
I pulled in briefly to establish what restriction applied;
no passenger boarded or alighted;
passing traffic and a pedestrian prevented an immediate safe
departure; and
I left at the first safe opportunity after understanding the
sign.
Accordingly, the alleged contravention did not occur and the PCN
should be cancelled. Should the council reject these
representations, please provide:
a reasoned explanation of how the sign’s orientation adequately
conveyed the restriction from my direction of approach;
the complete, unedited CCTV footage;
the applicable Traffic Management Order and all relevant
schedules and plans;
the precise TSRGD provisions and permitted variants relied upon;
any Secretary of State authorisation;
the sign’s inspection and maintenance records; and
any contemporaneous photographs showing the orientation of the
sign.
Please also confirm that the council has considered whether to
exercise its discretion to cancel the PCN separately from its
consideration of the statutory ground.
#Post#: 126532--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge PCN 46n – stopped for around 20 seconds on
Cranbrook Road
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: August 1, 2026, 6:14 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
It's too long - you need to cut it down somewhat.
#Post#: 126536--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge PCN 46n – stopped for around 20 seconds on
Cranbrook Road
DIR By: John_S
Date: August 2, 2026, 12:21 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You can literally use the wording I posted above. 2 or 3 lines
are sufficient at this stage because they’ll be rejected in any
case.
#Post#: 126599--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge PCN 46n – stopped for around 20 seconds on
Cranbrook Road
DIR By: Improt999
Date: August 2, 2026, 1:26 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
As others said redbridge will 99% reject the appeal. But it is
worth a very good shot at tribunal. I had the same on that
stretch of road. I will try find the tribunal report and post
it. But my appeal was allowed based on the fact that the signage
was faced towards oncoming traffic. Overall the stop was less
than 20 seconds.
#Post#: 126628--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge PCN 46n – stopped for around 20 seconds on
Cranbrook Road
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: August 2, 2026, 6:03 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
People just admit to everything. Put them to strict proof that
the signage is not only compliant but has also been maintained.
End of. I can tell you they won't have a clue re the 2nd point.
LET THEM PROVE THEIR CASE.
More you write, more you give them and the adjudicator.
In this case, they were all over the place:
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/london-borough-of-redbridge-pcn/msg126347/#msg126347
I put them to strict proof re signage and the rest is history -
or lack of it.
#Post#: 126657--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge PCN 46n – stopped for around 20 seconds on
Cranbrook Road
DIR By: tincombe
Date: August 3, 2026, 4:11 am
---------------------------------------------------------
...but adjudicators don't like appellants introducing
substantive grounds at appeal which have not been raised in
their reps.
IMO, there's a balance to be struck and I would include your
substantive defence.
But it's only a view.
#Post#: 126661--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge PCN 46n – stopped for around 20 seconds on
Cranbrook Road
DIR By: John_S
Date: August 3, 2026, 4:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote ---
> ...but adjudicators don't like appellants introducing
substantive grounds at appeal which have not been raised in
their reps.
--- End Quote ---
True, but so long as the OP has raised the specific arguments
he/she will later rely on, then the details can be included
later in ‘additional representations’ or a ‘skeleton argument’
and a ‘hearing bundle’ provided these comply with the practice
directions.
It’s worth remembering:
(1) you don’t want to show you full hand this early on; and
(2) the detailed evidence for cases like this can take several
days or weeks to compile properly.
#Post#: 126716--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge PCN 46n – stopped for around 20 seconds on
Cranbrook Road
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: August 3, 2026, 11:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The agreed advice of The Three Musketeers is to make the basic
points in the NOA which can be developed/tweaked or whatever
upon receipt of the evidence pack in the skeleton argument.
#Post#: 126719--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge PCN 46n – stopped for around 20 seconds on
Cranbrook Road
DIR By: tincombe
Date: August 3, 2026, 12:05 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Re-reading the thread, the OP has yet to make formal reps, we're
not at NOA yet.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 3
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page