DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 76996--------------------------------------------------
PCN Hammersmith and Fulham contravention 52M- RMV Rivercourt Rd
DIR By: Tod
Date: June 18, 2025, 7:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi everyone,
I’ve already submitted a challenge using the wording shared on
this forum, but unfortunately, it was rejected. I did u as
advised a photo showing all the confusing signage.
Would anyone be able to offer further advice?
Do you think it’s worth taking this to the Tribunal?
Here's the wording i've used:
I believe the PCN was unfairly issued due to the following
reasons:
1. Inadequate and Insufficient Signage
There were no clear and visible advance warnings on the A4
before reaching the exit to indicate the prohibition. I was
unaware that recent restrictions had been put in place. The
absence of prominent and timely signage meant I had no
reasonable opportunity to avoid the restriction or safely choose
an alternative route. I believe this falls short of the
standards required for proper enforcement and fair warning.
2. Pre-existing Engagement in an Uber Trip
At the time of the alleged contravention, I was actively engaged
in an Uber trip and navigating toward a designated passenger
pickup point. I have attached a screenshot of the journey as
evidence. The nature of ride-hailing work requires timely
pickups, and I was attempting to reach the passenger efficiently
while still complying with traffic rules.
3. Highway Safety Concerns
Upon exiting the A4, I was presented with a high density of
various signs, including multiple speed limits, parking
restrictions, camera enforcement notices, directional signs,
lorry-specific signage, and operational time restrictions. The
clutter of approximately 10 different signs in a single location
made it nearly impossible to safely interpret the restriction in
real time while negotiating a busy junction. The lack of clarity
creates a risk of misinterpretation and confusion, particularly
for drivers unfamiliar with recent changes.
4. Lack of Safe Alternatives
Once committed to the exit, there was no safe or lawful way to
reverse or avoid the restriction without violating Highway Code
Rules 200 and 201. The layout and positioning of the signage
effectively forced drivers to proceed, even if unaware of the
restriction. This scenario placed me in an untenable position,
where the only available option was to continue forward for
safety reasons.
5. First-Time Offence and Request for Discretion
I would also like to highlight that this is my first offence of
this nature. I have a clean driving record and always aim to
comply with traffic laws and local restrictions. I respectfully
request that this be taken into account and that the council
exercise discretion in waiving the penalty on this occasion. I
am now fully aware of the restriction and will avoid this route
in the future.
6. Request for Discretion and Review
In light of the above, I respectfully request that this PCN be
reviewed and cancelled. The combination of insufficient advance
warning, the complexity of signage, the operational nature of my
journey, and the lack of a safe alternative made the situation
unavoidable. I also urge the council to review the current
signage layout and consider improvements to prevent similar
incidents from occurring.
Thank you for taking the time to consider my representation. I
look forward to your response.
Yours sincerely,
..............
PCN number HZ91620754
VRN: YB22MXR
Thanks in advance for any help! [member=1]cp8759[/member]
Please find below photos of the PCN and letter of rejection.
HTML https://imgur.com/a/oNjUIe7
#Post#: 77018--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN Hammersmith and Fulham contravention 52M- RMV Rivercourt
Rd
DIR By: John U.K.
Date: June 18, 2025, 9:18 am
---------------------------------------------------------
For convenience:
HTML https://i.imgur.com/mSg2nD2.jpeg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/VwmKTIo.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/Lyb4ccO.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/WLFFa6x.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/FYLGpuw.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/C8nqrGh.jpeg
Despite including all your reps in their reply, they have only
addressed point 2 of of your six points, ignoring points1 and
3-6. That means you may add 'Failure to consider' to your
appeal.
You can register your appeal to LT. Make sure you opt for a
personal (= by videolinkl or telephone) hearing. Never, ever,
decision on papers.
In your shoes I'd simply write in the box I rely on my original
representations and add that the Council considered point 2 and
failed to consider the other six
OR
Copy and paste the original reps and add the bit about failure
to consider.
BUT
Give it a few days to see if the experts here have anything to
add (but do not miss deadlines got registering).
#Post#: 77037--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN Hammersmith and Fulham contravention 52M- RMV Rivercourt
Rd
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: June 18, 2025, 10:18 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Their letter of rejection completely fails to consider any of
your representations ! It goes into a load of guff about the
scheme, none of which is of any relevance whatsoever. If it were
me, I'd be taking them to London Tribunals, but it's your
decision.
As they now seem to be playing hardball, it would be a good idea
to see if any changes have been made to the signage, especially
any advance signs on the A4 main road.
#Post#: 77047--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN Hammersmith and Fulham contravention 52M- RMV Rivercourt
Rd
DIR By: John U.K.
Date: June 18, 2025, 10:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote ---
> it would be a good idea to see if any changes have been made
to the signage, especially any advance signs on the A4 main
road.
--- End Quote ---
This (or perhaps a similar sign)was the 'advance warning sign'
on the A4 eastbound.
[img width=768
height=432]
HTML https://i0.wp.com/www.hammersmithsociety.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/A4-LTN-signage.jpg?resize=768%2C432&ssl=1[/img]
Taken from
HTML https://www.hammersmithsociety.org.uk/rivercourt-road-a-new-two-way-ltn/
If this (or similar) is still in use, then
a) does not conform to TSRGD
b) being dot matrix, and facing due west, whenever the sun
shines, the sun will overpower the lights forming the display.
#Post#: 77092--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN Hammersmith and Fulham contravention 52M- RMV Rivercourt
Rd
DIR By: Tod
Date: June 18, 2025, 4:52 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: John U.K. link ---
>
> For convenience:
>
>
HTML https://i.imgur.com/mSg2nD2.jpeg
>
>
HTML https://i.imgur.com/VwmKTIo.png
>
>
HTML https://i.imgur.com/Lyb4ccO.png
>
>
HTML https://i.imgur.com/WLFFa6x.png
>
>
HTML https://i.imgur.com/FYLGpuw.png
>
>
HTML https://i.imgur.com/C8nqrGh.jpeg
>
> Despite including all your reps in their reply, they have only
addressed point 2 of of your six points, ignoring points1 and
3-6. That means you may add 'Failure to consider' to your
appeal.
>
> You can register your appeal to LT. Make sure you opt for a
personal (= by videolinkl or telephone) hearing. Never, ever,
decision on papers.
>
> In your shoes I'd simply write in the box I rely on my
original representations and add that the Council considered
point 2 and failed to consider the other six
> OR
> Copy and paste the original reps and add the bit about failure
to consider.
> BUT
> Give it a few days to see if the experts here have anything to
add (but do not miss deadlines got registering).
>
>
>
--- End Quote ---
Thank you for your advice John, agree with all of your points.
Will wait to see if theres anything more to be added and will
definitely consider appeal to LT.
#Post#: 77449--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN Hammersmith and Fulham contravention 52M- RMV Rivercourt
Rd
DIR By: Tod
Date: June 20, 2025, 5:12 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Incandescent link ---
>
> Their letter of rejection completely fails to consider any of
your representations ! It goes into a load of guff about the
scheme, none of which is of any relevance whatsoever. If it were
me, I'd be taking them to London Tribunals, but it's your
decision.
>
> As they now seem to be playing hardball, it would be a good
idea to see if any changes have been made to the signage,
especially any advance signs on the A4 main road.
>
--- End Quote ---
As you can see in the footage, there are quite a few signs along
the road, and with the sun glaring, it's really difficult to
notice and read them. Yes, there are two signs visible now, but
I honestly don’t even remember seeing them at the time,
especially with all the other distractions and traffic around.
HTML https://imgur.com/wdc6oW6
#Post#: 77452--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN Hammersmith and Fulham contravention 52M- RMV Rivercourt
Rd
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: June 20, 2025, 5:26 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The so called advance signs are not traffic signs, you see t hem
all over t he place to announce forthcoming roadworks where I
live, (near Crewe), and are very hard to read at 40 mph or more.
and are pretty much useless in my view. I would carry on.
However, as they are now playing hardball, you need to forego
the attractive discount, stand your ground and be prepared to
take them to London Tribunals.
#Post#: 77467--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN Hammersmith and Fulham contravention 52M- RMV Rivercourt
Rd
DIR By: John U.K.
Date: June 21, 2025, 12:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I've just noticed that the alleged offence took place at 8.20pm
on the 25th April.
Please could you download and post here the video, just in case
there is an additional point to be made in your defence.
#Post#: 77475--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN Hammersmith and Fulham contravention 52M- RMV Rivercourt
Rd
DIR By: Tod
Date: June 21, 2025, 4:13 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for pointing that out. Unfortunately, I no longer have
access to the video footage, as my camera does not retain
recordings for that long. It automatically overwrites older
footage after a certain period, so I’m unable to retrieve
anything from the 25th of April.
#Post#: 77483--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN Hammersmith and Fulham contravention 52M- RMV Rivercourt
Rd
DIR By: Tod
Date: June 21, 2025, 5:35 am
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://imgur.com/S9hShKn
If you mean the footage from their website, yes—I’ve already
downloaded it. The video footage demonstrates the danger
involved when a driver attempts to react abruptly to the signage
at this junction. Another vehicle, visible shortly after my
turn, decided to stop and turn around upon seeing the
restriction. As shown in the footage, this sudden manoeuvre
caused the car behind them to brake sharply and stop
unexpectedly to avoid a collision. This illustrates how
hazardous it would have been for me to attempt the same action,
especially with vehicles closely following behind me. In my
case, i was confused and I had only a few seconds to process the
signage while turning and, given the speed and proximity of the
traffic, any sudden stop or reversal would have created an
immediate risk to road safety. Continuing forward was the only
safe and responsible decision under the circumstances.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 3
DIR Next Page