DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 92946--------------------------------------------------
Re: Misleading signage, electric vehicle parking bay, London Wes
tminster
By: riccume Date: October 5, 2025, 6:03 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I've submitted the informal challenge, it can be found in the
shared folder here
HTML https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/x4vmzv3wru4ggx92dx13j/AAc0EUADJtCXjI93hbDhqu8?rlkey=2bqn72gn6wtfppzc0efg8kv9q&st=eicarlqw&dl=0.<br
/>I'm keeping the information provided by d612 in my back pocket
for now.
Thanks all!
#Post#: 92947--------------------------------------------------
Re: Misleading signage, electric vehicle parking bay, London Wes
tminster
By: fraser.mitchell Date: October 5, 2025, 6:45 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
D612's find is excellent and makes the prospect of success at
London Tribunals better.
#Post#: 92949--------------------------------------------------
Re: Misleading signage, electric vehicle parking bay, London Wes
tminster
By: H C Andersen Date: October 6, 2025, 2:04 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Given that this road marking is optional (para. 1 Part 5 refers
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/7),
I
don't follow how the presence or otherwise of road markings at
different locations with the same restriction provides a legal
argument.
Anyway, it's in the hands of the authority now.
OP, are you the registered keeper with current DVLA details?
This issue is important because if, as IMO is likely, your reps
are rejected then the next notice would go to the registered
keeper.
#Post#: 93038--------------------------------------------------
Re: Misleading signage, electric vehicle parking bay, London Wes
tminster
By: theronstar Date: October 6, 2025, 7:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hello everyone,
I am a London traffic warden, and most of the time just skulk
around in your forum, given our reputation.
I am sorry if what I am saying should have been said in a new
thread of my own, but because there is a live example in front
of us, I felt that it was appropriate to make my point here?
I am confused by the contravention code with which the
particular officer issued this PCN.
Whenever I issue a PCN on a vehicle that I observe in these
circumstances, I use contravention code 14
"Parked in an electric vehicles’ charging place during
restricted hours
without charging."
In this circumstance, the officer chose contravention code 23
"Parked in a parking place or area not designated for that class
of vehicle."
The parking place is exclusively for electric vehicles to park
AND charge their vehicle. e.g. I do issue Teslas in such a
scenario where they are parked in such a bay, and are not
plugged in, under code 14.
I take the view that the PCN was issued under the wrong offence
code, as it implies that a vehicle could park in this location,
so long as it is the right class of vehicle - an electric
vehicle - and that is not true.
Most London boroughs - including the aforementioned Westminster
- outsource our job to the private sector, which turns it into a
business, as opposed to the service that it really should be.
In plain English, it means that we are just on the streets to
dish out as many tickets as possible. The powers that be, surely
know that loads of them are duds, but due to the sheer numbers
issued, it is inevitably financially worthwhile
As for the main ground of appeal in this PCN - inadequate
signage - I observe so many bays that are signed like this, on a
daily basis. I accept the view that as much information as
possible is useful to a motorist who is about to park their car,
but suspect that adjudicators would open the floodgates if they
allowed appeals on this ground.
I say this, because there is some seriously shocking street
furniture in London, yet we are expected to enforce said
streets.
I am sorry for going off on one in your thread, but sadly it is
the only place where I can have a frank conversation about my
"profession."
#Post#: 93072--------------------------------------------------
Re: Misleading signage, electric vehicle parking bay, London Wes
tminster
By: stamfordman Date: October 6, 2025, 11:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
This is the relevant part of Westminster's order.
I'd say the contravention is correct as clearly you can't charge
a non-electric vehicle.
[img width=638
height=262]
HTML https://i.ibb.co/8D6m2LgD/Screenshot-2025-10-06-at-17-13-39.png[/img]
#Post#: 93151--------------------------------------------------
Re: Misleading signage, electric vehicle parking bay, London Wes
tminster
By: theronstar Date: October 6, 2025, 7:19 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hello Stamfordman,
I agree fully with you, in that you cannot charge a non-electric
vehicle.
When I issue a PCN on a vehicle in the electric charging point,
I do not concern myself with whether it is or is not an electric
vehicle.
In either scenario, I will explicitly refer to the type of
vehicle that I saw, when writing the PCN notes.
I use code 23 when I see a vehicle parking somewhere it should
not be. However, I never brought myself to using it in the
electric charging point, as it is a charging point, as opposed
to a parking place.
#Post#: 106104--------------------------------------------------
Re: Misleading signage, electric vehicle parking bay, London Wes
tminster
By: riccume Date: January 15, 2026, 4:00 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hello! Sorry I missed a few posts, not sure why I wasn't
notified.
Time for an update: I've now submitted the Informal and Formal
Challenge and they have both been rejected, as expected. You can
find all of the docs (challenges and rejections) here
HTML https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/x4vmzv3wru4ggx92dx13j/AAc0EUADJtCXjI93hbDhqu8?rlkey=2bqn72gn6wtfppzc0efg8kv9q&st=eicarlqw&dl=0.
As suggested by d612, I attached pictures of 5 of the closest EV
bays to the Formal Challenge; all of them have a carriageway
marking against each one of the spaces of the EV bay, unlike the
one where I parked. The NOR doesn't address this point.
I will now appeal to London Tribunals over the weekend,
basically using the same text used in the Formal Challenge - so
I am grateful for any suggestions you might have to tighten it
up. Thank you!
#Post#: 106412--------------------------------------------------
Re: Misleading signage, electric vehicle parking bay, London Wes
tminster
By: riccume Date: January 18, 2026, 1:01 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I forgot to mention; in order to support the argument that the
signage at this Electric Vehicle Bay is misleading to the
average motorist, I asked City of Westminster council to provide
the number of PCNs issued in 2025 for contravention code 231
'Parked in a parking place or area not designated for that class
of vehicle (electric vehicles bay)' on the road, where I
received the PCN, and the roads with the 5 closest Electric
Vehicle Bays.
These are the results:
1. St John's Wood Road - 29 [this is where I received the PCN]
2. Grove End Road - 10
3. Wellington Place - 2
4. Circus Road - 21
5. Rossmore Road - 0
I believe this data supports my argument, also keeping in mind
that the EVB on Circus Road is on a very busy high street (much
busier than St John's Wood Road).
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page