DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 6446--------------------------------------------------
Re: Barking 52M Failing to comply with prohibition
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: September 30, 2023, 6:38 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Well that's three out of four, so not a bad start.
At this point if they'd reoffered the 50% discount for PCN
BZ99502628 then I would have suggested that, unless someone
could identify a fairly solid ground of appeal, you might want
to consider paying it.
However as they've not reoffered the discount, there's really no
point in paying now: you might as well appeal as the penalty
stays the same if you lose, and goes down to £0 if you win.
Fortunately the one they haven't cancelled is the one where the
sign would have been obscured by the bus.
Would you like me to represent you at the tribunal?
#Post#: 6493--------------------------------------------------
Re: Barking 52M Failing to comply with prohibition
DIR By: fttboy
Date: October 1, 2023, 1:32 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi,
agreed, not a bad position at all; 3 out of 4.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I got the impression that they
re-offered the 50% discount until the end of the period of 14
days beginning from the date of service of the letter [cf 3rd
paragraph on page 2 of PCN: BZ99502628]. That being what we had
invited the council to consider in the representation.
But if I have misunderstood the text I'll be happy for you to
take the case forward.
Thanks
#Post#: 6514--------------------------------------------------
Re: Barking 52M Failing to comply with prohibition
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: October 2, 2023, 6:12 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Yes you're right, for some reason they've structured the letter
in an unusual way, normally the discounted amount is mentioned
first.
Anyway, I think there is a viable appeal against that PCN based
on the position of the bus in the video, I don't think you could
have seen the sign. You now need to decide whether you want to
pursue an appeal on that point, or whether you want to take the
discount offer.
#Post#: 6575--------------------------------------------------
Re: Barking 52M Failing to comply with prohibition
DIR By: fttboy
Date: October 2, 2023, 8:19 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I have until end of today to pay discounted charge.
An appeal at this stage is going to the tribunal, right?
I will need your guidance for that.
As an aside, and for my edification, would an adjudicator not
view appealing after the council has been at first hand
conciliatory as abuse of process of resolution? Just curious.
#Post#: 6598--------------------------------------------------
Re: Barking 52M Failing to comply with prohibition
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: October 3, 2023, 6:57 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If you want to appeal to the tribunal I'm happy to represent
you.
The adjudicator cannot consider mitigating or aggravating
factors, either the contravention occurred or it didn't.
#Post#: 6628--------------------------------------------------
Re: Barking 52M Failing to comply with prohibition
DIR By: fttboy
Date: October 3, 2023, 9:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks. I am happy for you to represent me.
What do I have to do now?
#Post#: 6768--------------------------------------------------
Re: Barking 52M Failing to comply with prohibition
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: October 5, 2023, 12:41 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I've dropped you a PM.
#Post#: 13434--------------------------------------------------
Re: Barking 52M Failing to comply with prohibition
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: January 7, 2024, 6:51 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Outcome
HTML https://drive.google.com/uc?id=1bfPO7ehc0_9O1OVpz0s2Jm1f_KKB59H3.
#Post#: 97905--------------------------------------------------
Re: Barking 52M Failing to comply with prohibition
DIR By: SunSunSuu
Date: November 12, 2025, 1:40 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hey guys, i got this same PCN and decided to fight it. They
denied my initial appeal and and i'm now formally challenging
it. However in doing my research i have found someone has
already appeal and won through this location for station parade
barking:
HTML https://londontribunals.org.uk/ords/pwslive/f?p=14952:70::INITIALISE::70:P70_CAS_REFNO,P70_PCN_REFNO,P70_RETURN_PAGE,P70_AST_CODE:1560981,2934024,60,APPEAL&cs=3H7-QAGGBgo46pi6iU1kXG-y4f42hNViXVMZPwLIUNyDq6zVCnBeJreOMW8b-JSDVeoVQaXNsgP5T50WZpiuYig
the case reference is 2230142184
"Mr Oliviera attended today.
The CCTV footage shows the appellant’s car drive past signs on
each side of the carriageway in Station Parade that indicate
that motor vehicles are prohibited. The appellant accepts that
he drove past the signs however he argues that there is
insufficient warning of the restriction and that by the time a
driver sees the signs it is not possible to easily make a U
turn. The appellant provides images from google street view in
support of his argument. During the hearing I looked at google
street view images from March 2022.
The local authority argues that there is sufficient warning of
the restriction and that the signs are clear.
The appellant drove from Linton Road and turned right into
Cambridge Road. At the junction of Cambridge Road and Station
Parade it is not permitted to turn right as there is a
pedestrian zone. The no motor vehicles signs are a short
distance after a driver turns left. I find that the signs are
not visible before a driver turns left.
The local authority provides a photograph of a warning sign in
Linton Road. The sign indicates that there is no left turn at
the first turning on the left and that all other routes are the
second turn on the left. Straight ahead is access to Linton Road
only. The road on the right is prohibited to vehicles over 7.5
tonnes except for buses and Vicarage Fields. The sign indicates
that the station is to the right. Mr Oliviera was driving to the
station.
I find that the warning sign in Linton Road relates only to
vehicles over 7.5 tonnes and not to all motor vehicles. I find
that the sign does not clearly indicate that all motor vehicles
need to take the second turn on the left.
There is an additional yellow warning sign that states no access
to Station Parade from Cambridge Road. Mr Oliviera argues that a
driver might not know the names of the roads.
Although there is no obligation for any warning sign in this
case if a motorist reaches the junction of Cambridge Road and
Station Parade they see a sign indicating that there is a
pedestrian zone on the right. The no motor vehicles signs are a
short distance from the left turn. The road is outside a station
and opposite a car park ramp and it does not appear to be a
place where it would appropriate to carry out a U turn. I find
that the sign in Linton Road does not give adequate warning of
the restriction and that in the absence of clear warning I find
that the overall signage for the restriction in Station Parade
is unclear.
I allow this appeal."
Ill inform on my appeal to but heres what i said is:
"I appeal on the ground that the alleged contravention did not
occur because the signage at Station Parade, Barking, fails to
adequately convey the restriction to motorists approaching the
location and creates an entrapment situation where compliance is
impossible once committed.
Under Regulation 18(1) of the Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders
(Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996 and Regulation
10(1) of the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions
2016 (TSRGD), the authority must ensure that restrictions are
clearly indicated and visible in time for drivers to comply
safely. The Traffic Signs Manual (Chapter 3, paras 1.21 & 3.1.2)
states that regulatory signs must provide adequate advance
warning where immediate compliance would be unsafe or
impracticable.
At Station Parade, the “No Motor Vehicles – Except buses, taxis
and cycles” sign is positioned only after a driver has already
turned, leaving no safe or lawful way to turn around. There is
no adequate advance warning, and once the sign becomes visible,
the motorist is effectively trapped. This layout has created an
ongoing entrapment location that has caught many otherwise
law-abiding drivers who cannot reasonably comply.
Furthermore, the enforcement authority failed to properly
consider my earlier representation as required by Schedule 1,
Paragraph 5(2) of the London Local Authorities and Transport for
London Act 2003. My challenge specifically raised the inadequate
signage, absence of advance warning, and unsafe layout. The
council’s rejection addressed only my reference to Google Maps,
ignoring the substantive signage issues. This constitutes a
failure to consider and therefore a procedural impropriety.
This same restriction and layout have already been ruled
inadequate by the Adjudicator in Case 2230142184 (Vitor Da Silva
Oliveira v London Borough of Barking and Dagenham, 27 March
2023). In that case, the Adjudicator found that the signs are
not visible before a driver turns, that the advance sign on
Linton Road does not give adequate warning, and that the overall
signage for Station Parade is unclear. The Adjudicator also
observed that a driver cannot make a safe U-turn once committed.
As the conditions remain unchanged, the same reasoning applies
here.
For these reasons, the signage fails to provide adequate advance
warning, the layout creates an unavoidable entrapment situation,
and the council failed to properly consider my representations."
#Post#: 118290--------------------------------------------------
Re: Barking 52M Failing to comply with prohibition
DIR By: SunSunSuu
Date: May 10, 2026, 7:08 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: SunSunSuu link ---
>
> Hey guys, i got this same PCN and decided to fight it. They
denied my initial appeal and and i'm now formally challenging
it. However in doing my research i have found someone has
already appeal and won through this location for station parade
barking:
>
>
HTML https://londontribunals.org.uk/ords/pwslive/f?p=14952:70::INITIALISE::70:P70_CAS_REFNO,P70_PCN_REFNO,P70_RETURN_PAGE,P70_AST_CODE:1560981,2934024,60,APPEAL&cs=3H7-QAGGBgo46pi6iU1kXG-y4f42hNViXVMZPwLIUNyDq6zVCnBeJreOMW8b-JSDVeoVQaXNsgP5T50WZpiuYig
>
> the case reference is 2230142184
>
> "Mr Oliviera attended today.
> The CCTV footage shows the appellant’s car drive past signs on
each side of the carriageway in Station Parade that indicate
that motor vehicles are prohibited. The appellant accepts that
he drove past the signs however he argues that there is
insufficient warning of the restriction and that by the time a
driver sees the signs it is not possible to easily make a U
turn. The appellant provides images from google street view in
support of his argument. During the hearing I looked at google
street view images from March 2022.
> The local authority argues that there is sufficient warning of
the restriction and that the signs are clear.
> The appellant drove from Linton Road and turned right into
Cambridge Road. At the junction of Cambridge Road and Station
Parade it is not permitted to turn right as there is a
pedestrian zone. The no motor vehicles signs are a short
distance after a driver turns left. I find that the signs are
not visible before a driver turns left.
> The local authority provides a photograph of a warning sign in
Linton Road. The sign indicates that there is no left turn at
the first turning on the left and that all other routes are the
second turn on the left. Straight ahead is access to Linton Road
only. The road on the right is prohibited to vehicles over 7.5
tonnes except for buses and Vicarage Fields. The sign indicates
that the station is to the right. Mr Oliviera was driving to the
station.
> I find that the warning sign in Linton Road relates only to
vehicles over 7.5 tonnes and not to all motor vehicles. I find
that the sign does not clearly indicate that all motor vehicles
need to take the second turn on the left.
> There is an additional yellow warning sign that states no
access to Station Parade from Cambridge Road. Mr Oliviera argues
that a driver might not know the names of the roads.
> Although there is no obligation for any warning sign in this
case if a motorist reaches the junction of Cambridge Road and
Station Parade they see a sign indicating that there is a
pedestrian zone on the right. The no motor vehicles signs are a
short distance from the left turn. The road is outside a station
and opposite a car park ramp and it does not appear to be a
place where it would appropriate to carry out a U turn. I find
that the sign in Linton Road does not give adequate warning of
the restriction and that in the absence of clear warning I find
that the overall signage for the restriction in Station Parade
is unclear.
> I allow this appeal."
>
> Ill inform on my appeal to but heres what i said is:
> "I appeal on the ground that the alleged contravention did not
occur because the signage at Station Parade, Barking, fails to
adequately convey the restriction to motorists approaching the
location and creates an entrapment situation where compliance is
impossible once committed.
>
> Under Regulation 18(1) of the Local Authorities’ Traffic
Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996 and
Regulation 10(1) of the Traffic Signs Regulations and General
Directions 2016 (TSRGD), the authority must ensure that
restrictions are clearly indicated and visible in time for
drivers to comply safely. The Traffic Signs Manual (Chapter 3,
paras 1.21 & 3.1.2) states that regulatory signs must provide
adequate advance warning where immediate compliance would be
unsafe or impracticable.
>
> At Station Parade, the “No Motor Vehicles – Except buses,
taxis and cycles” sign is positioned only after a driver has
already turned, leaving no safe or lawful way to turn around.
There is no adequate advance warning, and once the sign becomes
visible, the motorist is effectively trapped. This layout has
created an ongoing entrapment location that has caught many
otherwise law-abiding drivers who cannot reasonably comply.
>
> Furthermore, the enforcement authority failed to properly
consider my earlier representation as required by Schedule 1,
Paragraph 5(2) of the London Local Authorities and Transport for
London Act 2003. My challenge specifically raised the inadequate
signage, absence of advance warning, and unsafe layout. The
council’s rejection addressed only my reference to Google Maps,
ignoring the substantive signage issues. This constitutes a
failure to consider and therefore a procedural impropriety.
>
> This same restriction and layout have already been ruled
inadequate by the Adjudicator in Case 2230142184 (Vitor Da Silva
Oliveira v London Borough of Barking and Dagenham, 27 March
2023). In that case, the Adjudicator found that the signs are
not visible before a driver turns, that the advance sign on
Linton Road does not give adequate warning, and that the overall
signage for Station Parade is unclear. The Adjudicator also
observed that a driver cannot make a safe U-turn once committed.
As the conditions remain unchanged, the same reasoning applies
here.
>
> For these reasons, the signage fails to provide adequate
advance warning, the layout creates an unavoidable entrapment
situation, and the council failed to properly consider my
representations."
>
--- End Quote ---
I won, they apparently postponed my decision by over 3 months.
Im going to see if i can get some money off the council with
this too as they need to get a good kicking. Tbh most councils
need a kicking for being entirely little corrupt thugs posing as
law and order.
Adjudicator's Reasons Mr SunSunSuu's appeals against this PCN
because he says that the signage for this prohibited route is
not adequate to alert drivers to the restrictions and I agree. I
have looked at the CCTV footage and site images from the
Council. There is a no entry to motor vehicles sign placed on
either side of the road in Station Parade. I am not, however,
satisfied that this signage is adequate to alert motorists to
the restrictions. The signage is adjacent to a long bus stop
which means that the motorist is not travelling in the nearside
lane with the signage in their direct eyeline. Also, the signage
is no entry to motor vehicles except for buses, taxis and
cycles. Placing this sign adjacent to a bus stop must carry the
risk that a motorist seeing the sign will associate it with the
long bus stop area and not with the main carriageway. There is
an advance warning plate for no access to Station Parade via
Cambridge Road but this is of little assistance to a motorist
who is unfamiliar with the location. It is also essential that
signage is displayed in such a way that a motorist is able to
safely take evasive action to avoid the prohibited route and I
am not satisfied that such is the case at this location. This is
a busy road with bus stops on either side and there is no escape
from the prohibited route other than to stop in the middle of
the road to try to turn round. Sean Stanton-Dunne Adjudicator
11th March 2026 2250600882 BZ82355041
*****************************************************
Page 3 of 3
DIR Previous Page