DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 97089--------------------------------------------------
53 seconds into restricted time- pedestrian zone PCN Redbridge
DIR By: Captainships
Date: November 6, 2025, 10:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Dear all,
Driver was on their way to work and thought they had entered the
road before the 8am restriction. Their recollection is that the
time on the car was 7:59.
The time stamps on the council images show the car entering 53
seconds after the 8am restriction.
Can this be appealed?
Here is the image of the Pcn:
HTML https://freeimage.host/i/Kt1MrT7
And here is a close up image from Google maps of the signage at
the entrance of Rutland Road (the portion of the road which has
the restriction):
HTML https://freeimage.host/i/Kt1hrSj
#Post#: 97096--------------------------------------------------
Re: 53 seconds into restricted time- pedestrian zone PCN
Redbridge
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: November 6, 2025, 10:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Two things.
The closeness in time within a minute can win on its own at the
tribunal.
Looks like they have the term time signs with no dates, which
have also been rubbished at the tribunal.
HTML https://i.ibb.co/ym2Bcg5m/TFhu-Y0x-TRHFOUG5-Ve-HBtb-UUz-Ny9-KSGswd1-J6-ZVQ3e-URFSXZvbl-R6-SXNo-WDFYRTh6-OXp-VZj-NWZ2-Qr-Zkd-CO.gif
#Post#: 97105--------------------------------------------------
Re: 53 seconds into restricted time- pedestrian zone PCN
Redbridge
DIR By: Captainships
Date: November 6, 2025, 11:31 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Could anyone help with the wording of the challenge?
#Post#: 97244--------------------------------------------------
Re: 53 seconds into restricted time- pedestrian zone PCN
Redbridge
DIR By: Captainships
Date: November 7, 2025, 8:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Does this challenge work:
I am writing to challenge this PCN on the following grounds:
1. Trivial Timing – De Minimis Breach
According to the still images accompanying the PCN, the vehicle
entered the zone at 08:00:53, only 53 seconds after the
restriction came into effect at 8:00 am. However, the time on my
car was not showing 8:00 and I had entered the road thinking
that any potential restriction had not yet started.
I do not have independent confirmation of the accuracy of the
council’s recording device time. If the council’s timing is
accurate, any contravention was entirely unintentional and
occurred in a very brief period immediately after the
restriction began.
Such a minimal difference clearly falls within a reasonable
margin of timing variation between clocks and recording systems.
Entering the zone less than a minute after the restriction began
did not endanger pedestrians nor undermine the purpose of the
restriction. This is plainly a de minimis case — one so minor
that enforcement would be disproportionate and contrary to the
spirit of fair regulation.
2. Unclear “Term Time Only” Signage
Although I believed I had entered the road before the restricted
time shown on the sign, I was not certain if the restriction was
in force due to the accompanying sign that said "restricted
access term-time only". The sign does not specify any term
dates or provide a means of knowing when those terms begin and
end.
Adjudicators have previously criticised such signage as
ambiguous and unfair, since motorists cannot be expected to know
school term dates, which vary between boroughs and regions.
Without clear dates displayed or referenced, the signage fails
to convey the restriction adequately, and any enforcement based
on it is therefore unreasonable.
3. Request for Discretion
Even if a contravention is technically made out, I respectfully
ask the council to exercise discretion and cancel the PCN,
taking into account that:
a) The entry occurred less than one minute after the restriction
took effect; and
b) The signage was ambiguous in its “term time only” wording.
c) If the clock on the video recording device is accurate, then
this was an honest and very minor mistake, not a deliberate
attempt to contravene the restriction. The enforcement of such a
trivial breach would be disproportionate and contrary to the
public interest.
In summary:
The entry occurred only 53 seconds after the restriction start
time;
The signage was unclear regarding “term time only”; and
The council should apply discretion and cancel the PCN on
grounds of fairness and proportionality.
I look forward to your confirmation that the PCN has been
cancelled.
Best wishes
#Post#: 97264--------------------------------------------------
Re: 53 seconds into restricted time- pedestrian zone PCN
Redbridge
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: November 7, 2025, 9:48 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I would take out all that point 3 discretion - it's unnecessary.
Our member Hippo is hot on the signage so see if he chips in.
#Post#: 97301--------------------------------------------------
Re: 53 seconds into restricted time- pedestrian zone PCN
Redbridge
DIR By: Pastmybest
Date: November 7, 2025, 11:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Scrap point 1 You should not admit to anything
You should go with something along the lines of your clock
showing 7.59 so no contravention save the technical bit for
tribunal where we can give you winning arguments re timing and
the sign
#Post#: 97309--------------------------------------------------
Re: 53 seconds into restricted time- pedestrian zone PCN
Redbridge
DIR By: Captainships
Date: November 7, 2025, 12:19 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Is there a reason why it's better to make these arguments at
tribunal rather than now? Wouldn't it better to get all the
points at this stage so that there's a better chance to get it
all cancelled and not go tribunal.
#Post#: 97329--------------------------------------------------
Re: 53 seconds into restricted time- pedestrian zone PCN
Redbridge
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: November 7, 2025, 1:40 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: stamfordman link ---
>
> I would take out all that point 3 discretion - it's
unnecessary.
>
> Our member Hippo is hot on the signage so see if he chips in.
>
--- End Quote ---
+1
#Post#: 97381--------------------------------------------------
Re: 53 seconds into restricted time- pedestrian zone PCN
Redbridge
DIR By: Captainships
Date: November 8, 2025, 4:08 am
---------------------------------------------------------
OK, as per advice, I have removed point no. 3 and have amended
point no. 1:
I am writing to challenge this PCN on the following grounds:
1. Trivial Timing – De Minimis Breach
According to the still images accompanying the PCN, the vehicle
entered the zone at 08:00:53, only 53 seconds after the
restriction came into effect at 8:00 am.
I do not have independent confirmation of the accuracy of the
council’s recording device time. If the council’s timing is
accurate, any contravention was entirely unintentional and
occurred in a very brief period immediately after the
restriction began.
Such a minimal difference clearly falls within a reasonable
margin of timing variation between clocks and recording systems.
Entering the zone less than a minute after the restriction began
did not endanger pedestrians nor undermine the purpose of the
restriction. This is plainly a de minimis case — one so minor
that enforcement would be disproportionate and contrary to the
spirit of fair regulation.
2. Unclear “Term Time Only” Signage
Although I believed I had entered the road before the restricted
time shown on the sign, I was not certain if the restriction was
in force due to the accompanying sign that said "restricted
access term-time only". The sign does not specify any term
dates or provide a means of knowing when those terms begin and
end.
Adjudicators have previously criticised such signage as
ambiguous and unfair, since motorists cannot be expected to know
school term dates, which vary between boroughs and regions.
Without clear dates displayed or referenced, the signage fails
to convey the restriction adequately, and any enforcement based
on it is therefore unreasonable.
For these reasons, I ask the PCN to be cancelled.
Best wishes
#Post#: 97384--------------------------------------------------
Re: 53 seconds into restricted time- pedestrian zone PCN
Redbridge
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: November 8, 2025, 4:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
To whom is the PCN addressed, you by name?
You refer to 'driver' in the third person. The procedure has
nothing to do with the driver, it's the registered keeper whose
details appear as addressee who must respond.
To avoid stumbling at this procedural hurdle, pl tell us who's
who here?
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page