DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 80103--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge, 53j - restriction on vehicles entering a
pedestrian zone, Sydney road, Perrymans farm road,
DIR By: flash2005
Date: July 8, 2025, 9:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I have drafted an appeal here for review
HTML https://docs.google.com/document/d/1G2IOcoZEuYP-h-XJPCchcqnGj6vx9S3M7FSkGEKR4eU/edit?usp=sharing
HTML https://docs.google.com/document/d/1G2IOcoZEuYP-h-XJPCchcqnGj6vx9S3M7FSkGEKR4eU/edit?usp=sharing
#Post#: 80122--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge, 53j - restriction on vehicles entering a
pedestrian zone, Sydney road, Perrymans farm road,
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: July 8, 2025, 12:20 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: flash2005 link ---
>
> Should I file an initial appeal or wait for NTO from the
council ?
>
--- End Quote ---
There's no Notice to Owner, this is your sole opportunity to
submit reps. You must do this and get a rejection before you can
register an appeal with London Tribunals.
Here's the Act you'll see at the top of your PCN
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/2003/3/contents/enacted
#Post#: 80137--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge, 53j - restriction on vehicles entering a
pedestrian zone, Sydney road, Perrymans farm road,
DIR By: flash2005
Date: July 8, 2025, 1:22 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Incandescent link ---
>
> [quote author=flash2005 link=topic=7105.msg79586#msg79586
date=1751638252]
> Should I file an initial appeal or wait for NTO from the
council ?
>
--- End Quote ---
There's no Notice to Owner, this is your sole opportunity to
submit reps. You must do this and get a rejection before you can
register an appeal with London Tribunals.
Here's the Act you'll see at the top of your PCN
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/2003/3/contents/enacted
[/quote]
I have submitted the appeal to the council now.
#Post#: 80168--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge, 53j - restriction on vehicles entering a
pedestrian zone, Sydney road, Perrymans farm road,
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: July 8, 2025, 3:09 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
What have you written please?
#Post#: 80193--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge, 53j - restriction on vehicles entering a
pedestrian zone, Sydney road, Perrymans farm road,
DIR By: flash2005
Date: July 9, 2025, 12:43 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I have uploaded the appeal in the earlier post. Here it is
again
I am writing to formally challenge the above Penalty Charge
Notice on the following grounds:
1. INADEQUATE SIGNAGE AND VISIBILITY
The recently installed pedestrian zone signage is positioned at
an excessive height, making it virtually impossible for drivers
to clearly read the restrictions while safely operating their
vehicles. The sign placement fails to meet reasonable visibility
standards and creates a road safety hazard as drivers must crane
their necks upward to read the detailed restrictions.
2. LACK OF PROPER CONSULTATION AND NOTICE
These restrictions appear to have been implemented recently
without adequate public consultation or advance notice to
residents and local business users. As someone who has used this
route daily for over 10 years to access essential local
services, there was insufficient time to adapt to these sudden
changes.
3. UNREASONABLE RESTRICTION TIMING
The "term-time only" restriction is discriminatory and unclear
to residents without school-age children. This arbitrary timing
creates confusion for the general public who cannot reasonably
be expected to track school term dates, especially given that
different schools may have varying term schedules.
4. ESSENTIAL LOCAL ACCESS REQUIRED
I was accessing essential local services, specifically:
The Post Office on Sydney Road
Local businesses including the barber shop on Perrymans Farm
Road
These are legitimate destinations that serve the local
community, and the restrictions effectively prevent reasonable
access to essential services during broad daylight hours.
5. DISPROPORTIONATE ENFORCEMENT
Receiving two identical penalties within 40 minutes demonstrates
overzealous enforcement rather than genuine traffic management.
This suggests the restrictions are being used as a revenue
generation tool rather than for legitimate pedestrian safety
purposes.
6. MITIGATION CIRCUMSTANCES
Long-term road user: 10+ years of daily use without previous
issues
Essential service access: Accessing Post Office and local
businesses
Poor signage visibility: Unable to clearly read restrictions
while driving safely
Lack of awareness: No advance notice of restriction changes
Reasonable assumption: Believed access was permitted for
essential services
REQUESTED OUTCOME
I respectfully request that this Penalty Charge Notice be
cancelled in full on the grounds outlined above. The
circumstances demonstrate that this was not a deliberate
contravention but rather the result of inadequate signage,
insufficient public notice, and unreasonable restrictions that
prevent access to essential local services.
SUPPORTING EVIDENCE
Photographic evidence of high-mounted, poorly visible signage
Evidence of essential local business locations requiring access
I look forward to your prompt reconsideration of this matter and
the cancellation of this penalty charge.
#Post#: 80231--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge, 53j - restriction on vehicles entering a
pedestrian zone, Sydney road, Perrymans farm road,
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: July 9, 2025, 6:08 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Good stuff. Sorry still jet-lagged and lost passport-lagged. ;D
#Post#: 86210--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge, 53j - restriction on vehicles entering a
pedestrian zone, Sydney road, Perrymans farm road,
DIR By: flash2005
Date: August 18, 2025, 1:09 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Today I received rejection notice from the council on both the
PCNs
HTML https://i.imgur.com/rYhBxgE.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/86SOX9V.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/igP9W0n.jpeg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/Krv4Q8L.jpeg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/OWLwC7p.jpeg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/N6uTaQP.jpeg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/cWjz7Is.jpeg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/iLhUeh9.jpeg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/EBJdusY.jpeg
#Post#: 86211--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge, 53j - restriction on vehicles entering a
pedestrian zone, Sydney road, Perrymans farm road,
DIR By: John U.K.
Date: August 18, 2025, 1:30 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: flash2005 link ---
>
> Today I received rejection notice from the council on both the
PCNs
>
--- End Quote ---
Please to post it here.
#Post#: 86218--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge, 53j - restriction on vehicles entering a
pedestrian zone, Sydney road, Perrymans farm road,
DIR By: flash2005
Date: August 18, 2025, 2:14 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: John U.K. link ---
>
> [quote author=flash2005 link=topic=7105.msg86210#msg86210
date=1755540541]
> Today I received rejection notice from the council on both the
PCNs
>
--- End Quote ---
Please to post it here.
[/quote]
have posted it in the above post
Would appreciate any help in going to the London tribunals now
#Post#: 86235--------------------------------------------------
Re: Redbridge, 53j - restriction on vehicles entering a
pedestrian zone, Sydney road, Perrymans farm road,
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: August 18, 2025, 5:52 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
As far as I can see there is nothing wrong or inadequate in your
original reps, (Hippocrates said "good stuff"). However, the
regulations for traffic signs have been studied in more detail
since cases of very high, (even absurdly high) have arisen, and
recommendations on traffic sign positioning are found in Sectio
5.1 of the Traffic Signs Manual 2018: -
5.4 Mounting heights
5.4.1. Signs should be mounted such that the lower edge of the
sign is generally between 900 mm and 1500 mm above the highest
point of the adjacent carriageway. Signs mounted at the lower
end of this range benefit from receiving the most illumination
from vehicle headlamps, but they are also prone to soiling due
to spray from passing vehicles. Mounting heights at the higher
end of the range should be used where this or obscuration by
other vehicles is likely to be a problem. Speed limit signs and
other safety-critical signs will not normally be mounted lower
than 1500 mm above the carriageway.
5.4.2. Where signs are erected above footways and cycle tracks,
adequate clearance must be allowed for pedestrians, cyclists and
equestrians. Interim Advice Note 195/16 ‘Cycle Traffic and the
Strategic Road Network’ requires a minimum height for such
structures of 2300 mm for pedestrians and 2400 mm for cyclists.
However, to minimise the environmental impact of signs,
particularly large directional signs, consideration should be
given to adopting lower mounting heights. A minimum clearance of
2100 mm should be maintained over footways, 2300 mm over cycle
tracks or shared-use facilities and 2700 mm over equestrian
routes.
5.4.3. Detailed consideration may be necessary for the combined
effects of location and mounting height at some junctions in
order to take account of the differing eye heights of drivers of
cars, lorries and other road users. The aim is to optimise the
benefits and minimise the disadvantages to any one category of
road user at a given site. Alternatively, use of
LED- powered internally-illuminated signs might be
considered (see section 11). If signs are to be externally lit,
the signs should be raised to take into account the risk of
vandalism.
5.4.4. Regulatory signs must be placed as near as practicable to
the start of a restriction and it is preferable to place them on
the back line of the footway, or the verge where no footway is
present. They should not be placed right on the corner of the
junction, or right on the kerb side. Signs at a junction should
be set back from the road, where practical, to aid driver’s
visibility when turning in to that road. Setting a sign in this
manner makes it aesthetically more attractive, less liable to
damage, and more readily visible to road users who need to see
it. It may also be sensible to angle signs at junctions slightly
towards the side road carriageway so that they can be seen by
turning traffic (particularly at night where signs are not
directly lit and need to be illuminated by headlamps).
5.4.5. The fixing bands that attach the sign to the support
should be tight enough and of an appropriate design to stop
signs slipping or twisting around, or being deliberately rotated
to give incorrect information to drivers. Designers should
ensure adequate consideration is given to f ixings/support for
sign plates as this is one of the main causes of failure.
Manufacturers should supply suitable and appropriate fixings in
accordance with their own declaration of performance to prevent
panel separation, twist or slippage, including appropriate
torque settings.
So you can see the councils all so terrified of litigation if a
pedestrian bangs his head on a sign mounted above a pavement,
that they mount them beyond the tallest possible person !
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 5
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page