DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 127798--------------------------------------------------
Harrow PCN, code 83, Parked without ticket, Leisure Centre Car
Park
DIR By: S23
Date: August 14, 2026, 9:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Location: Leisure Centre Car Park
Date of PCN: 01/08/2026
Contravention: 83 - Parked in a car park without clearly
displaying a valid pay & display ticket or voucher or parking
clock
Link to PCN, signage and payment
machine:
HTML https://drive.proton.me/urls/GSN7AEWHBM#MOQm3O8HYGiQ
HTML https://drive.proton.me/urls/GSN7AEWHBM#MOQm3O8HYGiQ
Google street view:
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/XpJZtKBHoJPj72Ru8
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/XpJZtKBHoJPj72Ru8
The first three hours parking here are free, but a session needs
to be created on PayByPhone app or ticket machine.
Unfortunately the driver saw 'three hours free parking' and went
on their merry way as this was not their local area. For
reference, local car parks local have similar free parking
periods but do not require a valid session - this is handled by
ANPR.
There are some helpful tribunal cases here:
[spoiler]
--- Quote ---
>
> Case reference 2250678631
> Appellant Kola Oliyide
> Authority London Borough of HARROW
> VRM KR65DMY
> PCN Details
> PCN IY00280701
> Contravention date 14 Aug 2025
> Contravention time 10:31:00
> Contravention location LEISURE CENTRE CAR PARK
> Penalty amount GBP 90.00
> Contravention Parked in car park without clearly display
> Referral date -
> Decision Date 17 Apr 2026
> Adjudicator Andrew Harman
> Appeal decision Appeal allowed
> Direction
> cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and the Notice to Owner.
>
> Reasons
> The contravention alleged in these proceedings is that this
vehicle was parked in the Leisure Centre Car Park without
clearly displaying a valid pay and display ticket.
>
> There is no dispute that parking in this car park is free for
up to 3 hours.
>
> On the council's case, for that concession to apply, there is
a requirement that the vehicle upon being parked is registered
on Pay By Phone.
>
> On the officer's photographs what is written on the payment
machine cannot be read, and the council adduces no evidence that
this condition was clearly communicated to the appellant.
>
> The appellant provides an image of the car park tariff board.
>
> I am not satisfied, having considered his submissions on the
point, that the condition to register the vehicle is clearly
stated thereon.
>
> This contravention has not been proved.
>
> The appeal is allowed.
--- End Quote ---
--- Quote ---
> Case reference 2250592026
> Appellant xxxxxx
> Authority London Borough of HOUNSLOW
> VRM EX14ZKY
>
> PCN Details
> PCN NJ4272516A
> Contravention date 21 Aug 2025
> Contravention time 09:03:00
> Contravention location Heston Park Leisure Centre
> Penalty amount GBP 110.00
> Contravention Parked without payment of the parking charge
>
> Referral date -
>
> Decision Date 02 Apr 2026
> Adjudicator Edward Houghton
> Appeal decision Appeal allowed
> Direction cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and the Notice to
Owner.
> Reasons I heard the Appellant by audio link. . His case is
essentially that the requirement to make payment to park was not
sufficiently clearly indicated.
> The Council rely on the large white sign at the entrance o the
car park and the presence of other signage within it as shown in
the site photographs. However the Appellant t submits (supported
by a photograph) that the sign at the entrance positioned well
to the right is no clearly visible to a motorist turning left
into the car park . The site photographs show a scattering of
signs within the car park but none of them mention the
requirement for payment, The CEO photographed a small pay by
phone sign but where this was located in relation to the
Appellant’s vehicle is not clear. On balance it seems to me that
a good deal more could be done to alert the motorist to the fact
that payment was required. As I am not satisfied the requirement
relied on was sufficient clearly signed the Appeal is allowed.
> Although it is not necessary to come to a final conclusion on
the point it also seems to me a little difficult to see how a
PCN can be issued for a failure to make payment when it appears
from the Traffic Management Order that the first three hours of
parking are “free”, and when therefore ,by definition, no
payment is actually required.
--- End Quote ---
[/spoiler]
Potential issues identified for appeal:
- The location on the PCN - Leisure Centre Car Park - is
ambiguous.
- The contravention is parking without displaying a ticket -
technically this contravention would be incurred if using the
app to create a free session. There were working ticket machines
available, but driver is unsure whether the machine produces a
physical ticket to display for the free period.
- In the Harrow tribunal case at the same location, signage was
unclear. The driver of this PCN personally felt the signage was
confusing and therefore unclear. This would be especially
difficult for vulnerable drivers who do not have a blue badge.
(Pictures from the online evidence and driver show inconsistent
signage).
- In the Hounslow case, adjudicator noted that it's a little
difficult to see how a PCN could be issued for failure to make
payment when, by definition, no payment is actually required for
the free parking period.
Driver understands appeal (due tomorrow) may be rejected and
would be willing to be take it further to the adjudicator based
on cases above. What would you advise please?
#Post#: 127808--------------------------------------------------
Re: Harrow PCN, code 83, Parked without ticket, Leisure Centre
Car Park
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: August 14, 2026, 11:27 am
---------------------------------------------------------
For me, your case is not a "slam-dunk" win, because the signs do
say, below the three hours free text that a valid parking
session is required.
See what the others say, but if it were me, I'd not be taking
them to adjudication, as I don't think your case is strong
enough. The case you have cited would seem to be a PCN for
failing to make payment; your case is for not displaying a
ticket.
CEOs can check virtual sessions via apps on their hand-held
terminals, so if there is no parking ticket on display they look
on their HH terminals to see if a virtual session is set-up. If
no session, they then serve a PCN for failure to display.
#Post#: 127813--------------------------------------------------
Re: Harrow PCN, code 83, Parked without ticket, Leisure Centre
Car Park
DIR By: S23
Date: August 14, 2026, 2:05 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Incandescent link ---
>
> For me, your case is not a "slam-dunk" win, because the signs
do say, below the three hours free text that a valid parking
session is required.
> See what the others say, but if it were me, I'd not be taking
them to adjudication, as I don't think your case is strong
enough. The case you have cited would seem to be a PCN for
failing to make payment; your case is for not displaying a
ticket.
> CEOs can check virtual sessions via apps on their hand-held
terminals, so if there is no parking ticket on display they look
on their HH terminals to see if a virtual session is set-up. If
no session, they then serve a PCN for failure to display.
>
--- End Quote ---
I also cited a second case in Hounslow (within the spoiler tag)
- what do you feel with respect to that please?
#Post#: 127816--------------------------------------------------
Re: Harrow PCN, code 83, Parked without ticket, Leisure Centre
Car Park
DIR By: tincombe
Date: August 14, 2026, 3:25 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The cases you've cited are:
Failure to display...
Failure to pay..
Chalk and cheese.
There is an abundance of signs in your photos which state
3-hours free provided a ticket is displayed. Nowt to do with
paying, all to do with not displaying.
As the contravention occurred more than 3 hours after the car
park's opening time, I suspect an appeal to the authority's good
nature would fall on deaf ears unless you could show that the
car entered less than 3 hours prior to the contravention. Show,
not just state e.g. dashcam, *** tracking etc.
#Post#: 127887--------------------------------------------------
Re: Harrow PCN, code 83, Parked without ticket, Leisure Centre
Car Park
DIR By: S23
Date: August 15, 2026, 5:22 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
What about these three cases below:
This case relies on missing information in the signage which
also applies to our driver:
[spoiler]Case reference 2240380699
Authority London Borough of Harrow
Contravention date 28 Mar 2024
Contravention time 11:02:00
Contravention location Leisure Centre Car Park
Penalty amount GBP 60.00
Contravention Parked in car park without clearly display
Referral date -
Decision Date 24 Sep 2024
Adjudicator Sean Stanton-Dunne
Appeal decision Appeal allowed
Direction cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and the Notice to
Owner.
Reasons
[Appellant Representative] has attended the hearing today as the
authorised representative of [Appellant] and as the driver of
the vehicle at the time of the alleged contravention.
This PCN was issued for the alleged contravention of being
parked in a car park without clearly displaying a valid pay and
display ticket or voucher or parking clock.
It is not in dispute that the car was parked in a car park where
there was 3 hours of free parking with a signed requirement to
display a Free Ticket or activate a free parking session.
[Appellant] has explained that he mistakenly forgot to press the
final Parking tab to activate his parking session.
The signed instructions warn motorists that they will be liable
to receive a PCN if a vehicle is found displaying a Free Ticket
after the 3 hour free parking period has expired. The
instructions do not warn the motorist that they will be liable
to receive a PCN for failing to display a Free Ticket or for
failing to activate the free parking session and I allow the
appeal for that reason. It is also questionable whether there
was a requirement to display a pay and display ticket. As the
Council says, there was no payment due and the signed
requirement was to display a Free Ticket.[/spoiler]
This case hinges on insufficient signage:
[spoiler]Case reference 2240353674
Authority London Borough of Harrow
Contravention date 14 Apr 2024
Contravention time 12:12:00
Contravention location Leisure Centre Car Park
Penalty amount GBP 60.00
Contravention Parked in car park without clearly display
Referral date -
Decision Date 03 Sep 2024
Adjudicator Andrew Harman
Appeal decision Appeal allowed
Direction cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and the Notice to
Owner.
Reasons
The appellant attended the telephone hearing of this appeal
today.
The council did not attend the hearing.
This vehicle on the council's case was parked in the Leisure
Centre car park without clearly displaying a valid pay and
display ticket.
Parking is free in this car park for up to three hours provided
a parking session is registered against the vehicle or a ticket
obtained.
The appellant said that this was a huge car park almost the size
of a football pitch. He raised the issue of signage supported by
the evidence he provided arguing that it was insufficient. He
had parked for less than three hours. He was aware that three
hours free parking was permitted but he said he was unaware due
to insufficient signage that he had to register a parking
session against the vehicle or obtain a ticket to avail himself
of that concession.
He said that signage photographed by the officer was located in
the middle of the car park it being angled away from where he
parked.
The officer's photographs did not appear to show signage and the
vehicle together.
Although there was a sign at the car park's entrance, circled in
red in the appellant's photographs, he said it was small and
angled away from oncoming motorists.
On the officer's photographs the back of a sign affixed to a
post was visible and it may well be that this car park is
clearly signed throughout but I was not satisfied that the
council had proved that its signage was sufficient to alert the
appellant to the restriction it sought to enforce and I
accordingly found that the contravention did not
occur.[/spoiler]
This case hinges on unclear photographs (payment machine). In
our driver's circumstance, the car park tariff board cannot be
read:
[spoiler]Case reference 2250678631
Authority London Borough of Harrow
Contravention date 14 Aug 2025
Contravention time 10:31:00
Contravention location LEISURE CENTRE CAR PARK
Penalty amount GBP 90.00
Contravention Parked in car park without clearly display
Referral date -
Decision Date 17 Apr 2026
Adjudicator Andrew Harman
Appeal decision Appeal allowed
Direction cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and the Notice to
Owner.
Reasons
The contravention alleged in these proceedings is that this
vehicle was parked in the Leisure Centre Car Park without
clearly displaying a valid pay and display ticket.
There is no dispute that parking in this car park is free for up
to 3 hours.
On the council's case, for that concession to apply, there is a
requirement that the vehicle upon being parked is registered on
Pay By Phone.
On the officer's photographs what is written on the payment
machine cannot be read, and the council adduces no evidence that
this condition was clearly communicated to the appellant.
The appellant provides an image of the car park tariff board.
I am not satisfied, having considered his submissions on the
point, that the condition to register the vehicle is clearly
stated thereon.
This contravention has not been proved.
The appeal is allowed.[/spoiler]
#Post#: 127895--------------------------------------------------
Re: Harrow PCN, code 83, Parked without ticket, Leisure Centre
Car Park
DIR By: tincombe
Date: August 16, 2026, 3:06 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Driver understands appeal (due tomorrow) may be rejected and
would be willing to be take it further to the adjudicator based
on cases above.
This case relies on missing information in the signage which
also applies to our driver:
??
Who are you in this please? Previously you made reference to
'local car parks' and 'ANPR'. Council car parks do not operate
on this basis, so you must be referring to private ones. With
this(and PoFA) in mind, you might think that the identity of the
driver should be hidden.
It shouldn't.
It makes no difference (other than if the keeper was the driver
then anything they presented at adjudication would be first-hand
knowledge, which can be compelling) because this is keeper
liability, so when you refer to 'our' and 'the' driver, what do
you mean?
Is the keeper a person or corporate entity? Representations
against a Notice to Owner(your research shows you're well aware
of the notice types and the forward process) may only be made by
the keeper, and ultimately any appeal. Therefore if 'driver
willing to take this ..to appeal' is to be taken at face value,
then they must be the keeper.
But are they?
The 14-day discount period ended on 14th(began on 1 Aug).
#Post#: 127897--------------------------------------------------
Re: Harrow PCN, code 83, Parked without ticket, Leisure Centre
Car Park
DIR By: S23
Date: August 16, 2026, 4:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I was helping the registered keeper with their PCN, they will be
submitting themselves as RK.
I usually say driver as good practice, but you are right it does
not matter here. I may sound more competent than I am!
The 14 day period has been missed, but they submitted appeal on
15th August anyway as council website allowed it. I presume RK
now waits for NtO and submit formal representations at that
stage?
Do you feel those latter tribunal cases mean it would be worth
taking it to adjudicator? Similar circumstances apply
Thank you
#Post#: 127900--------------------------------------------------
Re: Harrow PCN, code 83, Parked without ticket, Leisure Centre
Car Park
DIR By: tincombe
Date: August 16, 2026, 4:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The only relevance of 14 days is:
The statutory discount period;
A corresponding period during which most councils would
re-offer the reduced payment in the event of unsuccessful reps
submitted during that period.
In reality, most councils re-offer this payment for 14 days
whenever informal reps are submitted. And some even after
unsuccessful formal reps.
Next steps:
Their response to informal reps, and/or
Service of a NTO at anytime after the 28-day period or after any
re-offered payment period lapses.
The RK just waits and I suggest coming back here at the end of
the month or earlier if they get a response beforehand.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1