DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 77870--------------------------------------------------
South Fulham Clean Air Neighbourhood, 52M - Failing to comply
with a prohibition on certain types of vehicles Studdridge
DIR By: triumph
Date: June 24, 2025, 5:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi all,
I've received a PCN from Hammersmith & Fulham for contravention
code 52M – Failing to comply with a prohibition on certain types
of vehicles – which allegedly took place on 09/06/2025 at 17:08
on Studdridge Street westbound, outside no. 10. The notice is
dated 19/06/2025.
The issue is that the "No motor vehicles" sign is only visible
just before the restriction itself, not at the junction. When
turning into Studdridge Street from the A217, the only visible
signage is a width restriction. The warning sign is placed
further along the road, and it’s quite easy to miss, especially
with cars parked along both sides. It’s also not shown on Google
Maps – I’ve taken photos to support this.
I was following my sat nav to avoid peak-time traffic, and I
followed other vehicles down the road without realising there
was a restriction. I don’t live in the borough and wasn’t
familiar with the area or any local clean air restrictions.
Do I have reasonable grounds to challenge this PCN, or is it
likely to be rejected? Any advice or similar experiences would
be appreciated
Edit
View PCN Evidence:
HTML https://ocmlive.xrxpsc.com/lbhf/ocm-fe/ocm/Details.aspx
PCN Number: HZ93115388
VNR: EX16YNV
Google Maps Location
HTML https://www.google.com/maps/@51.4727408,-0.192417,3a,75y,273.19h,82.36t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1smZRs8kPGU2h9WdIs1eSGwQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D7.6419756872834625%26panoid%3DmZRs8kPGU2h9WdIs1eSGwQ%26yaw%3D273.18918532508843!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDYxNi4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 77872--------------------------------------------------
Re: South Fulham Clean Air Neighbourhood, 52M - Failing to
comply with a prohibition on certain types of vehicles Studdr
DIR By: triumph
Date: June 24, 2025, 5:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Photos
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 77879--------------------------------------------------
Re: South Fulham Clean Air Neighbourhood, 52M - Failing to
comply with a prohibition on certain types of vehicles Studdr
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: June 24, 2025, 6:48 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote ---
> I was following my sat nav to avoid peak-time traffic,
--- End Quote ---
Which, of course, the restriction is in place to prevent !
Satnavs are never up-to-date, and relying on them without
looking out for signs like the ones here, (the Flying Motorbike"
sign) is very unwise.
Their sole evidence is the video. The photos on the PCN are
frames from this. Howevre, you've blanked out the PCN Number and
your car reg, so we can't view it. So please unblank these so we
can study the evidence. Only name and address require blanking
out.
Having said the above, the photo shows you have passed two very
prominent "Flying Motorbike" signs. At the turn into Studdridge
St, there are two prominent cul-de-sac signs: -
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/QeWE4auCn6xAEAZ57
then as one proceeds down the street, the width restriction can
be seen in the distance, plus two prominent "Flying Motorbike"
signs at the T-junction with Bowerdean St, where one would have
to turn into to avoid the restriction.
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/2h9NZbd9c3zhJYMs6#
Google Street View latest is July 2024, so doesn't show the
advance warning sign that you have shown in a photo.
Freankly, it is difficult to think of a robust argument against
the PCN, but maybe others on here can suggest something. There
may also possibly be a 'technical' appeal based on H & F
mismanagement of the enforcement process, and there are two
contributors on here who may be able to help you. However, don't
miss the deadline to submit representations or pay.
#Post#: 77886--------------------------------------------------
Re: South Fulham Clean Air Neighbourhood, 52M - Failing to
comply with a prohibition on certain types of vehicles Studdr
DIR By: triumph
Date: June 24, 2025, 7:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you Incandescent for the prompt reply. I really appreciate
the time you took to explain everything so clearly.
I have now updated the original post to include a link where the
evidence can be viewed online using the PCN number and VRN.
Hopefully that’ll make it easier for others to properly review
the situation.
#Post#: 79384--------------------------------------------------
Re: South Fulham Clean Air Neighbourhood, 52M - Failing to
comply with a prohibition on certain types of vehicles Studdr
DIR By: Bustagate
Date: July 3, 2025, 5:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I can see some good reasons to make representations and go to
appeal.
For starters, the sign in IMG_5252 is not a prescribed traffic
sign. H&F are notorious for inventing traffic signs. I've just
sent an FoI request
HTML https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/advance_notice_traffic_signs_wit<br
/>to them about another of these junk signs. It's complex, but
the
sign is based on diagram 818.4 of TSRGD 2016 but that sign can't
have a flying motorcycle embedded in it. Also, the text at the
top and bottom is too small.
Next, the road is so narrow between the parked vehicles that I
expect you were concentrating on not hitting anything and
managing the speed cushion before the junction with Bowerdean
Street. The presence of the parked and oncoming vehicles
inhibited your view of the flying motorcycle signs. Note the
following paragraphs from Chapter 1 of the Traffic Signs Manual
HTML https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5c419a1240f0b61704aec4d7/traffic-signs-manual-chapter-1.pdf:
--- Quote ---
>
> 5.1.1. This section describes the decision-making process
involved in choosing a location for
> an upright traffic sign. The positioning of signs has to be
considered very carefully to ensure that
> they are legible from the approaching road user’s point of
view, but also do not impede the view of other road users,
including pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists and equestrians,
particularly on side roads or in accesses. Environmental aspects
need to be considered so as to minimise visual intrusion as well
as the need for clear signing of legal requirements.
>
> 5.2.2. Signs are designed for the symbols and legends to be
recognisable and fully legible from
> defined distances depending on their type and the speed of
traffic. It is essential that the whole
> sign face is visible from these distances and over the entire
reading range, and not obscured by intervening obstructions.
Detailed advice is published in Chapters 3, 4 and 7 for
regulatory, warning and directional signs respectively.
>
--- End Quote ---
At the entrance to Studdridge Street there's a genuine diagram
818.4 giving advance notice of the width restriction. That,
however, lies after the more severe restriction banning all
motor vehicles except buses, taxis and permit holders. Until
2016 there were very few options for signs giving advance notice
of restrictions; width restrictions were one for which there was
a sign: diagram 818.4. Since 2016 authorities have been able to
create many more advance notice signs with a white background. I
would argue that H&F should have put such a sign at the entrance
to Studdridge Street which showed the flying motorcycle 50 yards
ahead and the width restriction 70 yards ahead. If they say
that's too much, they should have shown the flying motorcycle
alone (or a blue roundel - diagram 953 - with the permitted
vehicles) as it is reached first and affects far more vehicles.
Another notable absence from the signage is a sign telling
traffic which isn't allowed to pass the flying motorcycle where
it should go instead, i.e. turn right along Bowerdean Street and
then right and right again back to the A217. Such signs are
provided where there are physical restrictions, e.g. height.
There's a well-established principle that in the absence of
adequate advanced notice, no contravention occurred. This has
been confirmed at the Court of Appeal (R(Neil Herron et al) v
The Parking Adjudicator). That's the line I would push. Whether
you will succeed is another matter. Taking it to appeal means
forgoing the possibility of the "50% discount". It's your
choice.
#Post#: 80667--------------------------------------------------
Re: South Fulham Clean Air Neighbourhood, 52M - Failing to
comply with a prohibition on certain types of vehicles Studdr
DIR By: triumph
Date: July 12, 2025, 4:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for your help Bustagate, I made a representation. :D
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1