URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 90073--------------------------------------------------
       Hammersmith & Fulham - code 53C Failing to comply with a
       restriction on vehicles entering a pedestri
   DIR By: sjcuk7
       Date: September 15, 2025, 1:10 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi there, received on Saturday 13th Sept this PCN for a
       contravention on the 2nd Sept.
       Travelling along Hartswood Road and turning right into Cobbold
       Road I entered the restricted zone at 1 minute past the 8am
       start time.
       I was using this route to circumnavigate the roadworks at the
       roundabout junction of Askew Road and Goldhawk Road, and and the
       awful tailback into Goldhawk Road.
       I don't usually have to bypass my usual route but the jam was
       particularly bad that morining and was making me late for work.
       I used my car Sat Nav map for a detour, turned left onto
       Stamford Brook Road and approached Cobbold road travelling north
       on Hartswood Road.
       [img width=1100
       height=88.99107360839844]
  HTML https://i.imgur.com/degkIyz.jpg[/img]
       [img width=1100
       height=88.99107360839844]
  HTML https://i.imgur.com/ykhoCKX.jpg[/img]
       The PCN states I have 28 days to pay £160 and also a 14 day
       period to pay the reduced amount of £80, however the images
       submitted were from an unmanned permanent static camera, does
       this constitute a CCTV one? Can I argue that their notice should
       offer 21 days as a reduced period and is therefore invalid?
       Granted I may have misunderstood what is and isn't a CCTV one,
       but I can't see that this is a different form of camera as it's
       not live.
       [img width=1100
       height=88.99107360839844]
  HTML https://i.imgur.com/mda4fWN.jpg[/img]
       [img width=1100
       height=88.99107360839844]
  HTML https://i.imgur.com/qF2XNHi.jpg[/img]
       [img width=1100
       height=88.99107360839844]
  HTML https://i.imgur.com/WHzS8HH.jpg[/img]
       [img]
  HTML https://imgur.com/jwi5r54[/img]
       [img]
  HTML https://imgur.com/qF2XNHi[/img]
       [img]
  HTML https://imgur.com/WHzS8HH[/img]
       Finally I need to check the approach from Hartswood Road for any
       warning signage, I'll post back with anything I find, I doubt
       there isn't any - If there isn't do I have a good case on that
       alone?
       Streetmap link -
  HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/eV6zmPvNf3teyv3K9
       EDIT: I vividly recall noticing the huge pencils marking the
       crossing point as I came up to the junction, in fact I'd go as
       far as to say they were where my eyes were directed when
       checking the direction of traffic, rather than the highly
       mounted signs.
       #Post#: 90074--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Hammersmith & Fulham - code 53C Failing to comply with a
       restriction on vehicles entering a pede
   DIR By: sjcuk7
       Date: September 15, 2025, 1:11 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I have posted my i.imgur links but for some reason this forum
       wasn't resolving them in my post
  HTML https://i.imgur.com/degkIyz.jpg
  HTML https://i.imgur.com/ykhoCKX.jpg
  HTML https://i.imgur.com/mda4fWN.jpg
  HTML https://i.imgur.com/qF2XNHi.jpg
  HTML https://i.imgur.com/WHzS8HH.jpg
       #Post#: 90106--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Hammersmith & Fulham - code 53C Failing to comply with a
       restriction on vehicles entering a pedestri
   DIR By: fraser.mitchell
       Date: September 15, 2025, 5:32 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       The photos on your PCN are frames from a video taken by their
       CCTV camera. You should be able to view this video on their
       website using PCN Number and car reg.
       GSV is not sufficiently up-to-date, because the GSV link you
       posted is for August 2024, and doesnt show the restriction
       signs, therefore no advance sign. If you want to submit
       representations, you need to do some legwork with a camera to
       see if there are any advance signs on the road you used,
       Hartswood Road. Another aspect is that the time of the alleged
       contravention is only 1 minute after the restriction start time,
       so you could argue that whilst the council camera is no doubt
       synchronised with an atomic clock somewhere, such technology is
       not present on most motor car clocks, so you consider the one
       minute to fall within the grounds of de minimis, and ask the
       council to use some common sense when serving PCNs based on
       times.
       #Post#: 90194--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Hammersmith & Fulham - code 53C Failing to comply with a
       restriction on vehicles entering a pedestri
   DIR By: sjcuk7
       Date: September 16, 2025, 8:31 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Incandescent link ---
       >
       > The photos on your PCN are frames from a video taken by their
       CCTV camera. You should be able to view this video on their
       website using PCN Number and car reg.
       > GSV is not sufficiently up-to-date, because the GSV link you
       posted is for August 2024, and doesnt show the restriction
       signs, therefore no advance sign. If you want to submit
       representations, you need to do some legwork with a camera to
       see if there are any advance signs on the road you used,
       Hartswood Road.
       --- End Quote ---
       Thanks for all your advice. I've been back and taken pictures of
       Cobbold Road's pre-warning signs and the lack of any in
       Hartswood Road.
  HTML https://imgur.com/gcAv278
  HTML https://imgur.com/igp7ENM
       I've further checked the wording on all the signs, which
       indicate a restriction from Sept-July, from 8am - 9.30am and
       2.30pm - 4pm. Clearly the restriction's intended purpose to to
       prevent traffic during school drop off and collection times, the
       location given on the PCN even states "Wendell Park School -
       Cobbold Rd"
       On the date of my contravention, 2nd September there was no
       school, they had an inset day and term didn't commence until the
       day after on the 3rd.
  HTML https://www.wendellpark.lbhf.sch.uk/News___Events/Term-Dates-25102021143445/<br
       />
  HTML https://imgur.com/h3kYwZj
       #Post#: 90214--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Hammersmith &amp; Fulham - code 53C Failing to comply with a
       restriction on vehicles entering a pedestri
   DIR By: fraser.mitchell
       Date: September 16, 2025, 10:37 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       OK, so the council have clearly recognised that advance warning
       is necessesary by providing an advance warning on the approach
       to the restriction, but have ignored the more important need for
       people turning right from Hartswood road. So I suggest your reps
       make two points, (1) PCN time of one minute into the restriction
       is ridiculous because vehicle clocks are not totally accurate,
       and some allowance should be made for that. APplication of
       common sense by those issuing PCNs is needed. and (2) No advance
       warning sign for vehicles turning right from Hartwood Road, yet
       the council provide advance warning on Cobbold Road, where the
       signs are visible from much further away. Mention council duty
       under LATOR  Regulation 18, to provide adequate signs of
       restrictions.
       #Post#: 94426--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Hammersmith &amp; Fulham - code 53C Failing to comply with a
       restriction on vehicles entering a pedestri
   DIR By: almep13
       Date: October 16, 2025, 5:46 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi,
       Have you received a response on your appeal? Although judging by
       how long it took LBHF to reject my appeal, just over 60 days
       (appealed on 08 July and it was rejected on 08 Oct), I doubt
       you'd have received a response yet. But if you have, I'd be keen
       to know their response.
       Kind regards,
       Almep13
       #Post#: 106849--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Hammersmith &amp; Fulham - code 53C Failing to comply with a
       restriction on vehicles entering a pedestri
   DIR By: sjcuk7
       Date: January 21, 2026, 1:31 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi there,
       No I HAVEN'T recieved a response yet. As it has been over four
       months now since I lodged my appeal I wrongly assumed the case
       had been closed. Astonishingly, according to their website, it's
       still very much OPEN !!!!
       #Post#: 106859--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Hammersmith &amp; Fulham - code 53C Failing to comply with a
       restriction on vehicles entering a pedestri
   DIR By: almep13
       Date: January 21, 2026, 3:05 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi sjcuk7,
       Thanks for your reply.
       My case is at London Tribunals scheduled for a video-hearing in
       March 2026.
       Let's keep one-another updated with the outcomes of our appeals.
       Thanks and regards,
       Almep13
       #Post#: 106870--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Hammersmith &amp; Fulham - code 53C Failing to comply with a
       restriction on vehicles entering a pedestri
   DIR By: sjcuk7
       Date: January 21, 2026, 3:38 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Best of luck.
       If I'm right my case should have expired as it was served by
       post, making it a Notice to Owner and requiring my appeal to be
       responded to within 56 days, unless I've misunderstood
       somewhere.
       #Post#: 106883--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Hammersmith &amp; Fulham - code 53C Failing to comply with a
       restriction on vehicles entering a pedestri
   DIR By: fraser.mitchell
       Date: January 21, 2026, 4:45 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: sjcuk7 link ---
       >
       > Best of luck.
       >
       > If I'm right my case should have expired as it was served by
       post, making it a Notice to Owner and requiring my appeal to be
       responded to within 56 days, unless I've misunderstood
       somewhere.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       I see no PCN has been posted yet, so please do so. Look at the
       legislation at the top of the PCN. the 56 day limit to reply to
       formal reps against a Notice to Owner only applies to the
       Traffic Management Act 2004.  However, the council also have a
       duty of fairness, so getting on for 5 months means the
       unfairness test is met, in my opinion. You should win on this
       alone if you take them to London Tribunals.
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 3
   DIR Next Page