gopher.createaforum.com/1/forums/ftla/p/5743/1

   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 65790--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Brent, code 53 failing to comply with a restriction, Mora
       Rd/junc. with St. Michael's Rd
   DIR By: fraser.mitchell
       Date: April 5, 2025, 12:42 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote ---
       > adequate information
       --- End Quote ---
       You have to demonstrate to an adjudicator that the signage is
       inadequate. The problem with what is adequate and what is not,
       is subjective. The council will always refuse your reps, because
       they won't consider their own signage as anything less than
       perfect.
       #Post#: 65848--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Brent, code 53 failing to comply with a restriction, Mora
       Rd/junc. with St. Michael's Rd
   DIR By: crxvtec
       Date: April 6, 2025, 9:22 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Incandescent link ---
       >
       > [quote]adequate information
       --- End Quote ---
       You have to demonstrate to an adjudicator that the signage is
       inadequate. The problem with what is adequate and what is not,
       is subjective. The council will always refuse your reps, because
       they won't consider their own signage as anything less than
       perfect.
       [/quote]
       Here's what I submitted.
       Regulation 18 (1) of The Local Authorities� Traffic Orders
       (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996:
       "(a)before the order comes into force, the placing on or near
       the road of such traffic signs in such positions as the order
       making authority may consider requisite for securing that
       adequate information as to the effect of the order is made
       available to persons using the road;"
       If you look at the placement of the restriction signs relative
       to the road junction, these signs aren't clearly legible when
       approaching the junction from St. Michael's Road, as happened in
       this instance, therefore there is only reliance on the advance
       warning sign, and the advance warming sign falls short of the
       required standard as it is bent out of shape, as evidenced in
       photos
  HTML https://ibb.co/gZDgWN4H
       
  HTML https://ibb.co/xKP98Jpr
       and
  HTML https://ibb.co/p6kxxd6H
       
  HTML https://ibb.co/LzpBddWj
       shows that the nearside restriction sign
       placement is "side on" from St. Michael's Road, and therefore
       illegible. It also shows the far side sign is too close to the
       junction,  under a metre from the kerb, and in order to read it
       before passing it, the driver would need to be looking out of
       the side window, instead of the windscreen, when taking the
       right turn from St. Michael's Road to Mora Road. This is
       evidenced here:
  HTML https://ibb.co/LhBzgF4X
       and the opposite
       perspective is shown here:
  HTML https://ibb.co/Q7swJr27
       Further, the camera evidence doesn't show any of the restriction
       signs - it simply shows a vehicle driving down a road at a given
       time.
       In summary, the advance warning sign is damaged, one restriction
       sign cannot be read at all due to it being side on to St.
       Michael's Road, and the third restriction sign could only be
       read if not looking in the direction of travel, i.e., if driving
       without due care and attention, and that too only for a very
       brief moment during the right turn before that sign too becomes
       illegible as it would be side on. Without adequate information
       being presented to the driver, the offence did not occur and the
       PCN should be cancelled.
       I note also that the website only allowed me to submit a general
       representation; it didn't have the various options that the form
       had. Please see
  HTML https://ibb.co/Y5MTHz3
       #Post#: 99853--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Brent, code 53 failing to comply with a restriction, Mora
       Rd/junc. with St. Michael's Rd
   DIR By: crxvtec
       Date: November 26, 2025, 5:19 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I have heard nothing since my last submission. I have now
       received this.
  HTML https://ibb.co/5xMkgLSk
       I have been waiting for a response or cancellation but nothing
       arrived to date until this letter.
       I also noticed that a previous PCN has been cancelled under
       appeal for the same circumstances: BT19070959
       What should I do next?
       #Post#: 99914--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Brent, code 53 failing to comply with a restriction, Mora
       Rd/junc. with St. Michael's Rd
   DIR By: Hippocrates
       Date: November 26, 2025, 8:38 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Assuming you made reps. wait for the Order for Recovery and TE
       form then show it.
       #Post#: 100024--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Brent, code 53 failing to comply with a restriction, Mora
       Rd/junc. with St. Michael's Rd
   DIR By: crxvtec
       Date: November 27, 2025, 5:37 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       OK...would it be worth asking the council for their response to
       my representations in the meantime? I wouldn't want them to
       suggest that I never made them (they were made directly into
       their website so they could "conveniently" lose them...)
       #Post#: 105328--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Brent, code 53 failing to comply with a restriction, Mora
       Rd/junc. with St. Michael's Rd
   DIR By: crxvtec
       Date: January 10, 2026, 12:30 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Hippocrates link ---
       >
       > Assuming you made reps. wait for the Order for Recovery and TE
       form then show it.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       I've received the Order for Recovery of Unpaid Penalties today.
       Should I just repeat the representations I made prior or is
       there anything further I should add?
       #Post#: 105330--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Brent, code 53 failing to comply with a restriction, Mora
       Rd/junc. with St. Michael's Rd
   DIR By: John U.K.
       Date: January 10, 2026, 12:55 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: crxvtec link ---
       >
       > [quote author=Hippocrates link=topic=5743.msg99914#msg99914
       date=1764167917]
       > Assuming you made reps. wait for the Order for Recovery and TE
       form then show it.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       I've received the Order for Recovery of Unpaid Penalties today.
       Should I just repeat the representations I made prior or is
       there anything further I should add?
       [/quote]
       NO!  You make no more reps at this stage. Please post up here
       the documents you have received (only redact yr name & address -
       leave all else in), as per @Hippocrates request, and read this,
       which outlines the process, including the next steps.
  HTML https://www.ftla.uk/announcements/charge-certificates-london-local-authorities-and-tfl-act-2003-london-l-1805/
       #Post#: 105425--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Brent, code 53 failing to comply with a restriction, Mora
       Rd/junc. with St. Michael's Rd
   DIR By: crxvtec
       Date: January 11, 2026, 12:02 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Here are the 3 pages/6 ides I have received, with name/address
       deprecated.
  HTML https://ibb.co/pB07MmdC
  HTML https://ibb.co/LLVB2Lq
  HTML https://ibb.co/20Rzz2mr
  HTML https://ibb.co/TxqTjkCj
  HTML https://ibb.co/bMVdYKPW
  HTML https://ibb.co/jPFgQRmg
       #Post#: 105429--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Brent, code 53 failing to comply with a restriction, Mora
       Rd/junc. with St. Michael's Rd
   DIR By: Hippocrates
       Date: January 11, 2026, 12:17 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: crxvtec link ---
       >
       > Here are the 3 pages/6 ides I have received, with name/address
       deprecated.
       >
       >
  HTML https://ibb.co/pB07MmdC
       >
  HTML https://ibb.co/LLVB2Lq
       >
  HTML https://ibb.co/20Rzz2mr
       >
  HTML https://ibb.co/TxqTjkCj
       >
  HTML https://ibb.co/bMVdYKPW
       >
  HTML https://ibb.co/jPFgQRmg
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       What happened at the TEC stage?
       #Post#: 105432--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Brent, code 53 failing to comply with a restriction, Mora
       Rd/junc. with St. Michael's Rd
   DIR By: crxvtec
       Date: January 11, 2026, 12:20 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       When I called them, the debt hadn't been registered. I called
       them back and it hadn't been registered then either. Then
       Christmas/New Year happened and I forgot all about it.
       *****************************************************
       Page 2 of 4
   DIR Previous Page
   DIR Next Page