DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 76183--------------------------------------------------
LBHF - 52M Prohibition on certain vehicles, Rivercourt Road
turning from Great west road (A4)
DIR By: mfaiz
Date: June 12, 2025, 6:26 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Contravention Description: 52M - Failing to comply with a
prohibition on certain types of vehicle (m) motor vehicles
Contravention Explaination:
Location: RMV Rivercourt Rd NthBnd adj nos 17 (va)
Contravention Date: 26/05/2025
Really confused I have taken this road multiple times in the
past. I can see several other people
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/pcn-hammersith-london-rivercourt-rd/<br
/>have had PCN in relation to this road. Appears there has been
some changes.
Initially I was baffled as I thought the other car in the video
was the one who should have been charged going through no-entry.
My initial slowing down was on the surprise of seeing the car
going the other way, but then I found this:
HTML https://www.lbhf.gov.uk/news/2024/11/making-rivercourt-road-safer
I have not received a warning letter. I have gone back and
thought of the last time I used that road and I am certain this
is the first time. I would say going at 40mph and turning in on
a road that I have used multiple times in the past without issue
and now it has restricted / controlled access. The signage
leaves a lot to be desired.
Video of Evidence:
HTML https://imgur.com/7A09bY9
[img]
HTML https://i.imgur.com/7A09bY9.mp4[/img]
#Post#: 76197--------------------------------------------------
Re: LBHF - 52M Prohibition on certain vehicles, Rivercourt Road
turning from Great west road (A4)
DIR By: John U.K.
Date: June 12, 2025, 7:44 am
---------------------------------------------------------
A successful thread here
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/pcn-rivercourt-road-hammersmith-successful-representation/msg0/#new
with some useful photos of the signage.
Also see
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/hammersmith-and-fulham-code-52m-failing-to-comply-with-a-prohibition-on-certain-/msg72894/#new
Have a read of those before drafting your reps, then post the
draft here for comment before submitting to H&F, but do not miss
deadlines.
So far H&F have backed down in every case we know of before it
reaches tribunal.
#Post#: 76213--------------------------------------------------
Re: LBHF - 52M Prohibition on certain vehicles, Rivercourt Road
turning from Great west road (A4)
DIR By: mfaiz
Date: June 12, 2025, 8:58 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks [member=5]John U.K.[/member] I have gone through the post
mentioned as well as some others see my draft below. This
response goes through the official website
HTML https://www.lbhf.gov.uk/parking/parking-tickets-and-enforcement/challenge-fine<br
/>? or as an email to them directly?
--- Code ---
Dear Hammersmith & Fulham Council,
I am writing to formally challenge the issuance of PCN HZxx on
the grounds based on the following key points:
1. Inadequate Advance Signage on the A4
There were no clear advance warning signs on the A4 prior to
the Rivercourt Road junction to alert drivers of the
restriction. This omission fails to meet the legal requirements
under Regulation 18 of the Local Authorities' Traffic Orders
(Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996 (LATOR). In
contrast, the Oxfordshire County Council case (R v The Bus Lane
Adjudicator [2010] EWHC 894 (Admin)) established that without
adequate signage, no contravention occurs. The absence of staged
warning signs (e.g., at 450, 180, and 20 yards) renders the
restriction unenforceable.
2. Lack of Statutory Compliance with TfL Oversight
The A4 is a Transport for London (TfL) road. Under Section
121B of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, H&F Council must
consult TfL and obtain approval before implementing any
restrictions affecting TfL-managed roads. If such consultation
did not occur, or if signage was placed without TfL’s consent,
the restriction is procedurally invalid. I request formal
evidence that these statutory obligations were fulfilled.
--- End Code ---
^^I am not entirely sure point 2 this needs to be on here or
not, does this strengthen or weaken my case. I feel its a
stretch but happy to be guided
--- Code ---
3. Safety Hazards Created by Road Layout
The current road layout poses a significant safety risk.
Vehicles exiting the A4 must stop within 8 metres of the
junction, despite the Highway Code indicating a braking distance
of 13.5 metres at 30mph. This is particularly hazardous for
larger vehicles, which may be forced to obstruct the A4 to
comply. This contradicts the Council’s duty under Section 122 of
the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 to ensure safe and
efficient traffic flow.
4. Excessive and Confusing Signage at the Junction
Upon exiting the A4, drivers are immediately confronted with a
cluster of signs—speed limits, parking rules, camera
enforcement, one-way indicators, and more. This overload of
information at a critical decision point compromises driver
safety and comprehension, especially for unfamiliar road users.
5. Lack of Notice and Confusing Circumstances for a Non-Local,
Habitual User
As someone who regularly visits family in the area but does
not reside in London, I am a habitual user of this route. I was
unaware of any recent changes to the road layout or
restrictions. On this occasion, the situation was further
complicated by the presence of a vehicle in front of me that
appeared to be travelling in the wrong direction. This added to
the confusion, especially as I have always understood this
street to be one-way—an understanding reinforced by the
prominent "No Entry" signs visible to traffic exiting onto the
A4. Combined with the overwhelming number of signs at the
junction and preceding, it was not reasonably possible to
process all the information and safely navigate the turn without
inadvertently committing a contravention.
6. No Safe or Legal Way to Avoid the Restriction Once
Committed
Once a vehicle has exited the A4, there is no safe or legal
way to reverse or turn around. Doing so would breach Highway
Code Rules 200 and 201 and endanger both the driver and other
road users. The design of the junction leaves no viable
alternative once the turn is made.
Given these substantial legal and safety concerns, I
respectfully request that this PCN be cancelled. The
restriction, as currently implemented, is neither lawful nor
safe.
I look forward to your confirmation that this charge has been
withdrawn.
--- End Code ---
#Post#: 76284--------------------------------------------------
Re: LBHF - 52M Prohibition on certain vehicles, Rivercourt Road
turning from Great west road (A4)
DIR By: mark1
Date: June 12, 2025, 3:42 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Like everyone else today Hammersmith cancelled my 2 PCN’s for
going down Rivercourt Rd as I had a date at the Tribunal.
Something is seriously wrong here. Obviously the Council are
running scared as a judgement against them could force them the
refund everyone issued with a PCN since this half baked scheme
was introduced last year. I advise anyone not to pay and
challenge the Council at the Tribunal. I hope this is helpful
#Post#: 76291--------------------------------------------------
Re: LBHF - 52M Prohibition on certain vehicles, Rivercourt Road
turning from Great west road (A4)
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: June 12, 2025, 4:38 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: mark1 link ---
>
> Like everyone else today Hammersmith cancelled my 2 PCN’s for
going down Rivercourt Rd as I had a date at the Tribunal.
Something is seriously wrong here. Obviously the Council are
running scared as a judgement against them could force them the
refund everyone issued with a PCN since this half baked scheme
was introduced last year. I advise anyone not to pay and
challenge the Council at the Tribunal. I hope this is helpful
>
--- End Quote ---
Refunds ? Councils very rarely refund PCN payments after an
adjudicator decision. Only when it gets into the Press and
political pressure is applied is it ever done. Yes, this is a
dangerous trap, and H&F should be pilloried for this, but being
London, this seldom happens.
#Post#: 76354--------------------------------------------------
Re: LBHF - 52M Prohibition on certain vehicles, Rivercourt Road
turning from Great west road (A4)
DIR By: John U.K.
Date: June 13, 2025, 6:55 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote ---
> Thanks @John U.K. I have gone through the post mentioned as
well as some others see my draft below. This response goes
through the official website
HTML https://www.lbhf.gov.uk/parking/parking-tickets-and-enforcement/challenge-fine<br
/>? or as an email to them directly?
--- End Quote ---
Reply#2 reads OK to me, give it a couple of days to see if
anyone els comments, but do not miss deadlines.
Don't be surprised if H&F reject: they seem to then fold when
someone registers tribunal appeak.
Use whatever method given on the PCN: e-mail gives you more
freedom to format properly, but make sure you keep a hard copy
and get and print-off an acknowlegement.
#Post#: 76546--------------------------------------------------
Re: LBHF - 52M Prohibition on certain vehicles, Rivercourt Road
turning from Great west road (A4)
DIR By: mfaiz
Date: June 15, 2025, 5:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for your response. I believe I have 14 days from 10th
June which was the issue notice.
The only thing with reply 2 is that they could be like yes we
consulted... now what?
#Post#: 76551--------------------------------------------------
Re: LBHF - 52M Prohibition on certain vehicles, Rivercourt Road
turning from Great west road (A4)
DIR By: John U.K.
Date: June 15, 2025, 6:13 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: mfaiz link ---
>
> Thanks for your response. I believe I have 14 days from 10th
June which was the issue notice.
>
> Check the PCN (you have not yet posted it?). I can't remember
with this particular PCN type whether it's 14 days from date of
issue or from date of service to preserve discount.
>
> The only thing with reply 2 is that they could be like yes we
consulted... now what?
>
> I don't understand the point you're making here? Either H&F
will reply rejecting saying blah-blah 'we've carefully
considered yr letter and see no reason to cancel' blah-blah (in
ahich case you register an appeal with tribunal), or they accept
and cancel.
>
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 76562--------------------------------------------------
Re: LBHF - 52M Prohibition on certain vehicles, Rivercourt Road
turning from Great west road (A4)
DIR By: mfaiz
Date: June 15, 2025, 10:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Sorry I wasn't clear i meant point number 2:
2. Lack of Statutory Compliance with TfL Oversight
The A4 is a Transport for London (TfL) road. Under Section 121B
of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, H&F Council must
consult TfL and obtain approval before implementing any
restrictions affecting TfL-managed roads. If such consultation
did not occur, or if signage was placed without TfL’s consent,
the restriction is procedurally invalid. I request formal
evidence that these statutory obligations were fulfilled.
I was questioning if it is worth mentioning this point as part
of the appeal.
#Post#: 76563--------------------------------------------------
Re: LBHF - 52M Prohibition on certain vehicles, Rivercourt Road
turning from Great west road (A4)
DIR By: John U.K.
Date: June 15, 2025, 10:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Save for one of the experts (I don't count myself as one)
chippinhg in contrariwise, I see no harm including it.
It might even be a tipping-point to persuade the lowly office
bod considering your reps to accept your reps (but don't build
up yr hopes too high!).
As I said above, it seems 99.99% certain that H&F will
ultimately concede, but is likely to be at the last minute.
-------------------------
EDIT
Going through them again I've just noticed that yr draft reps
bleed off to the right - for the convenience of others I've
copied and pasted them here:
--- Quote ---
>
> Draft Reps
>
> Dear Hammersmith & Fulham Council,
>
> I am writing to formally challenge the issuance of PCN HZxx on
the grounds based on the following key points:
>
> 1. Inadequate Advance Signage on the A4
> There were no clear advance warning signs on the A4 prior to
the Rivercourt Road junction to alert drivers of the
restriction. This omission fails to meet the legal requirements
under Regulation 18 of the Local Authorities' Traffic Orders
(Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996 (LATOR). In
contrast, the Oxfordshire County Council case (R v The Bus Lane
Adjudicator [2010] EWHC 894 (Admin)) established that without
adequate signage, no contravention occurs. The absence of staged
warning signs (e.g., at 450, 180, and 20 yards) renders the
restriction unenforceable.
>
> 2. Lack of Statutory Compliance with TfL Oversight
> The A4 is a Transport for London (TfL) road. Under Section
121B of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, H&F Council must
consult TfL and obtain approval before implementing any
restrictions affecting TfL-managed roads. If such consultation
did not occur, or if signage was placed without TfL’s consent,
the restriction is procedurally invalid. I request formal
evidence that these statutory obligations were fulfilled.
>
> 3. Safety Hazards Created by Road Layout
> The current road layout poses a significant safety risk.
Vehicles exiting the A4 must stop within 8 metres of the
junction, despite the Highway Code indicating a braking distance
of 13.5 metres at 30mph. This is particularly hazardous for
larger vehicles, which may be forced to obstruct the A4 to
comply. This contradicts the Council’s duty under Section 122 of
the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 to ensure safe and
efficient traffic flow.
>
> 4. Excessive and Confusing Signage at the Junction
> Upon exiting the A4, drivers are immediately confronted with a
cluster of signs—speed limits, parking rules, camera
enforcement, one-way indicators, and more. This overload of
information at a critical decision point compromises driver
safety and comprehension, especially for unfamiliar road users.
>
> 5. Lack of Notice and Confusing Circumstances for a Non-Local,
Habitual User
> As someone who regularly visits family in the area but does
not reside in London, I am a habitual user of this route. I was
unaware of any recent changes to the road layout or
restrictions. On this occasion, the situation was further
complicated by the presence of a vehicle in front of me that
appeared to be travelling in the wrong direction. This added to
the confusion, especially as I have always understood this
street to be one-way—an understanding reinforced by the
prominent "No Entry" signs visible to traffic exiting onto the
A4. Combined with the overwhelming number of signs at the
junction and preceding, it was not reasonably possible to
process all the information and safely navigate the turn without
inadvertently committing a contravention.
>
> 6. No Safe or Legal Way to Avoid the Restriction Once
Committed
> Once a vehicle has exited the A4, there is no safe or legal
way to reverse or turn around. Doing so would breach Highway
Code Rules 200 and 201 and endanger both the driver and other
road users. The design of the junction leaves no viable
alternative once the turn is made.
>
> Given these substantial legal and safety concerns, I
respectfully request that this PCN be cancelled. The
restriction, as currently implemented, is neither lawful nor
safe.
>
> I look forward to your confirmation that this charge has been
withdrawn.
--- End Quote ---
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 3
DIR Next Page