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#: 95621--------------------------------------------------
       Redbridge - 53j Perrymans Farm Road - Failing to comply with a
       pedestrian zone restriction
   DIR By: toblerone187
       Date: October 26, 2025, 9:35 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       EDIT: Dropbox links to my pictures and video now posted in my
       reply to this post as imgpile links do not seem to be working
       My wife was visiting an area that she used to live in but had
       not been back to for a few years.
       She turned right into Perrymans Farm Road to drive past her old
       school, not realising that is now restricted at certain times to
       pedestrians and cycles only.
       Given the positioning of the restriction signs which are right
       at the entrance to the road, and parallel to the main road, they
       are almost impossible to read.  This is exacerbated by the fact
       that there is a yellow box there so her focus was on navigating
       that as she was waiting for a car to let her through.
       Please can someone advise if she has good grounds for an appeal
       and the chances of being successful
       Here is the GSW link:
  HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/mY9w46dNAXxL6bKJ9
       This is the same location as these previous threads:
  HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/redbridge-53j-perrymans-farm-road-pedestrian-zone-restriction/
  HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/redbridge-perrymans-farm-pcn-(school-roads)
  HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/redbridge-53j-entering-a-pedestrian-zone-perrymans-farm-road/
       (The "Term time" wording mentioned in these cases has now been
       covered over by a blue sticker)
       Front and back of PCN:
       [img width=600]
  HTML https://imgpile.com/p/T8NCv6Z[/img]
       We took some photos today from which you can see that the signs
       are extremely difficult to read from the road position when
       turning right as they are positioned so close to the main road,
       unlike the 20mph restriction signs that are set back and able to
       be read before turning
       [img width=600]
  HTML https://imgpile.com/p/pz9S35j[/img]
       Here is a dashcam video taken today that shows the same.  The
       signs are almost impossible to read by someone in a moving car
       up to and throughout the turn.  Bear in mind that the dashcam is
       from a position to the left of the driver (as are the photos as
       they were taken by a passenger)so from the driver's perspective
       they signs are even less visible
       [img width=600]
  HTML https://imgpile.com/p/TVDjcTY[/img]
       Any help and advice would be greatly appreciated
       Thanks
       N.B. Dropbox links to my pictures and video now posted in my
       reply to this post as imgpile links do not seem to be working
       #Post#: 95623--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Redbridge - 53j Perrymans Farm Road - Failing to comply with
       a pedestrian zone restriction
   DIR By: toblerone187
       Date: October 26, 2025, 9:54 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       The images of the PCN were rejected as spam by imgpile so here
       are Dropbox links:
  HTML https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/p4qd14zzktymqwf5cedte/PCN-front.jpg?rlkey=io8tic0v81nvjme8j8e016uj3&dl=0
  HTML https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/loqy1xvc3tq9u5g3z63g6/PCN-back.jpg?rlkey=q1mvotbqauu3jakjj9feakw09&dl=0
       In case the other imgpile links don't work here are Dropbox
       links:
       Photos:
  HTML https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/irdoi3k63wwmp24oq9y13/2025-10-26-12.09.47.jpg?rlkey=pjt3f1ui04m1280ymt0m49o9a&dl=0
  HTML https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/bwv5z8wmk6fpmre52khsg/2025-10-26-12.09.56.jpg?rlkey=1np9tw2e9counagyxwr2nxr0t&dl=0
       Video:
  HTML https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/fugonntqgrsjsbepedsvf/2025-10-26_12-09-28-front.mp4?rlkey=f22556ggi8bojqw2tmtqua0c1&dl=0
       #Post#: 95646--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Redbridge - 53j Perrymans Farm Road - Failing to comply with
       a pedestrian zone restriction
   DIR By: fraser.mitchell
       Date: October 26, 2025, 12:49 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Unfortunately her case is compromised by the presence of an
       advance warning sign: -
  HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/H4wTxALSh45CatA27
       #Post#: 95958--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Redbridge - 53j Perrymans Farm Road - Failing to comply with
       a pedestrian zone restriction
   DIR By: toblerone187
       Date: October 28, 2025, 1:51 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       The previous appeals were successful despite the presence of
       that sign though.
       Is it worth trying?
       #Post#: 95968--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Redbridge - 53j Perrymans Farm Road - Failing to comply with
       a pedestrian zone restriction
   DIR By: fraser.mitchell
       Date: October 28, 2025, 2:17 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: toblerone187 link ---
       >
       > The previous appeals were successful despite the presence of
       that sign though.
       >
       > Is it worth trying?
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Well, if previous cases have been sccessful, it must be.
       However, are the previous cases the same with the same signs ?
       #Post#: 95969--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Redbridge - 53j Perrymans Farm Road - Failing to comply with
       a pedestrian zone restriction
   DIR By: stamfordman
       Date: October 28, 2025, 2:18 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I think Hippo has just won a load of cases for the same person
       on the silly term time only sign.
       #Post#: 95970--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Redbridge - 53j Perrymans Farm Road - Failing to comply with
       a pedestrian zone restriction
   DIR By: Hippocrates
       Date: October 28, 2025, 2:19 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       PCN omits mandatory information.
       I make this collateral challenge against the validity of the
       PCN as it is missing mandatory information as provided at
       Para. 4 (8 ) (v) of
  HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/2003/3/section/4/enacted
       (v)that, if the penalty charge is not paid before the
       end of the 28 day period, an increased charge may be payable.
       Clearly, this refers to Para. 4 (8 ) (iii):
       (iii)that the penalty charge must be paid before the
       end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of the
       notice;
       Therefore, it follows that the statement: If you fail to pay
       the
       Penalty Charge or make   representations before the end of a
       period
       of 28 days beginning with the date of service of this notice an
       increased charge of £240 may be payable. adds to the lack of
       clarity
       by its omission. Even on its own, whether the required
       information
       was included or not, it is also arguable that it conflates the
       two
       periods using the word "or" which many would view as being
       conjunctive. Furthermore, even if the statement were to be
       interpreted disjunctively, there is still no clarity due to the
       missing information
       #Post#: 95972--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Redbridge - 53j Perrymans Farm Road - Failing to comply with
       a pedestrian zone restriction
   DIR By: Hippocrates
       Date: October 28, 2025, 2:23 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: stamfordman link ---
       >
       > I think Hippo has just won a load of cases for the same person
       on the silly term time only sign.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
  HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/lb-of-redbridge-school-streets-pedestrian-zone-pcn-53j-perrymans-farm-road-appea/msg95861/#msg95861
       I have asked cp to add the details.
       #Post#: 96356--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Redbridge - 53j Perrymans Farm Road - Failing to comply with
       a pedestrian zone restriction
   DIR By: H C Andersen
       Date: October 31, 2025, 12:49 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Does anyone have the underlying order?
       Where's the council's video in this case? (I'm drowning in
       references to other cases!).
       Whether a 'blue sticker' is on an unofficial sign or not is not
       for me the issue.
       If the Order restricts the application of the prohibition to
       'term time' or any similar meaning, then the traffic sign is
       defective because it must convey the order's provisions and
       doesn't.
       
       #Post#: 96446--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Redbridge - 53j Perrymans Farm Road - Failing to comply with
       a pedestrian zone restriction
   DIR By: toblerone187
       Date: November 1, 2025, 12:16 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Hippocrates link ---
       >
       > PCN omits mandatory information.
       >
       >
       > I make this collateral challenge against the validity of the
       > PCN as it is missing mandatory information as provided at
       > Para. 4 (8 ) (v) of
       >
       >
  HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/2003/3/section/4/enacted
       >
       > (v)that, if the penalty charge is not paid before the
       > end of the 28 day period, an increased charge may be payable.
       > Clearly, this refers to Para. 4 (8 ) (iii):
       > (iii)that the penalty charge must be paid before the
       > end of the period of 28 days beginning with the date of the
       notice;
       >
       > Therefore, it follows that the statement: If you fail to pay
       the
       > Penalty Charge or make  representations before the end of a
       period
       > of 28 days beginning with the date of service of this notice
       an
       > increased charge of £240 may be payable. adds to the lack of
       clarity
       > by its omission. Even on its own, whether the required
       information
       > was included or not, it is also arguable that it conflates the
       two
       > periods using the word "or" which many would view as being
       > conjunctive. Furthermore, even if the statement were to be
       > interpreted disjunctively, there is still no clarity due to
       the
       > missing information
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Apologies I have been away
       Also my thread appears to have been hijacked by others so I am
       not sure where I stand on this and what applies to my wife case
       or whether it is relating to Unhappyprince9's case
       Is the above quoted info in relation to my wife's PCN
       AF2098641A??
       Is this the grounds that we should be fighting it on or should
       it be fought on the poor visibility of signs?
       What do we need to do next?
       I am conscious that the 14 day deadline for 50% discount is
       coming up so just want to know where we stand and what needs to
       be done
       Many thanks for any assistance
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 2
   DIR Next Page