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#: 106226--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Upon Thames PCN 47j Stopped on a restricted bus
       stop Location – Clarence Street
   DIR By: Pauldon3576
       Date: January 16, 2026, 1:08 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi Hippocrates,
       I have received a reply today in the post rejecting the
       representation, please see below and let me know what you think!
       Regards
       Paul
  HTML https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/PRwAtoh_md.jpg
  HTML https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/0Bpl1U2_xl.jpg
  HTML https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/sO58mCQ_xl.jpg
  HTML https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/4uxVq9A_xl.jpg
  HTML https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/ZQDDlBR_xl.jpg
       #Post#: 106234--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Upon Thames PCN 47j Stopped on a restricted bus
       stop Location – Clarence Street
   DIR By: Hippocrates
       Date: January 16, 2026, 2:08 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       They have not considered the certificate  issue. I'll balance
       the issues. I lost a case the other day (may ask for a review)
       in which the council provided a valid certificate but not a
       witness statement. This is different and you had raised the
       issue. There is always the grounds issue too. Life is getting
       tougher at the moment with some adjudicators.
       #Post#: 106307--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Upon Thames PCN 47j Stopped on a restricted bus
       stop Location – Clarence Street
   DIR By: Pauldon3576
       Date: January 17, 2026, 1:52 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Thanks Hippocrates.
       They did ignore the cctv proof request and made no comment on
       the single sign and lack of visibility at night.
       I also notice that they replied stating a "moving" traffic
       violation. Is this correct?
       Do I presume the signage they have is correct and lawful?
       Regards
       Paul
       #Post#: 106353--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Upon Thames PCN 47j Stopped on a restricted bus
       stop Location – Clarence Street
   DIR By: Hippocrates
       Date: January 18, 2026, 5:18 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
  HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/stopping-at-bus-stop-pcn-victoria-road-surbiton/msg56673/#msg56673
  HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1qexr8OS0A75Tlc1XX_Oz_4UdhyYJQjLB/view
       The reference to a moving traffic contravention is, of course, a
       blunder but not probably enough to convince an adjudicator to
       allow the appeal.
       The strongest points are the failure to consider the camera
       issue and not provide proof of such. The "unable to cancel"
       could be argued to fetter their discretion. And, the inadequate
       grounds issue on the website.
       If you want to meet up, I am speaking at this meeting re the
       infamous Kingston Road box junction this coming Thursday. The
       Press will be there.
  HTML https://www.ftla.uk/news-press-articles/that-kingston-box-junction/msg105997/#msg105997
       #Post#: 109470--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Upon Thames PCN 47j Stopped on a restricted bus
       stop Location – Clarence Street
   DIR By: Pauldon3576
       Date: February 11, 2026, 9:56 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi All,
       I have decided to appeal to London tribunals and also asked RBK
       for the 2nd time to strict proof that the camera has a valid
       certificate.
       They have replied in writing and simply said "please note that
       the CCTV cameras are installed and operated by council and
       therefore certified".
       Now that my appeal date is set, they have since provided the
       evidence of said camera to the tribunal!
       If they had provided this to me in the first instance I may well
       have decided not to appeal!
       Am I likely to get any recognition of this from the appeal
       tribunal? As my appeal grounds are now very thin.
       I could do with some help in drafting my appeal in light of the
       above information.
  HTML https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/NukiCFe_md.png
       #Post#: 109482--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Upon Thames PCN 47j Stopped on a restricted bus
       stop Location – Clarence Street
   DIR By: fraser.mitchell
       Date: February 11, 2026, 10:40 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I'm afraid this is how they ruthlessly game the system. However
       worth mentioning to the adjudicator.
       #Post#: 110787--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Upon Thames PCN 47j Stopped on a restricted bus
       stop Location – Clarence Street
   DIR By: Pauldon3576
       Date: February 23, 2026, 9:24 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi All,
       I could do with some help in drafting my appeal comments in
       light of the above information!
       With RBK referring just back to the 2004 act, does that mean
       that all of my other queries about correct sign, visible signs
       and length of bus stop are not valid? Or just being ignored.
       Regards
       P
       #Post#: 110836--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Upon Thames PCN 47j Stopped on a restricted bus
       stop Location – Clarence Street
   DIR By: Hippocrates
       Date: February 23, 2026, 1:56 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       E mail me.
       #Post#: 111759--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Upon Thames PCN 47j Stopped on a restricted bus
       stop Location – Clarence Street
   DIR By: Pauldon3576
       Date: March 2, 2026, 9:33 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi All,
       The appeal has been successful!
       A big thank you to Hippocrates for his solid steer in the right
       direction with regard to signage and all advice.
       Your time was very much appreciated, as I was apprehensive about
       challenging this PCN.
       A big thumbs up to all at FTLA who assist and contribute.
       Factors regarding the bus stop position after a sharp bend, the
       length of bay, inadequate signage, pedestrians in play and
       lighting were all acknowledged.
       Ultimately the signage and markings in place were not
       substantially compliant, clear and adequate for the site.
       And despite 2 requests for them to supply the information, RBK
       deliberately did not send me the camera evidence
       (which they did indeed have and subsequently provided to the
       tribunal). I voiced strong views about this behaviour.
       Regards
       P
       #Post#: 111763--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Kingston Upon Thames PCN 47j Stopped on a restricted bus
       stop Location – Clarence Street
   DIR By: Hippocrates
       Date: March 2, 2026, 10:05 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Brilliant  and you had one of the best adjudicators too.
       2260070912.
       Did they provide a witness statement?
       *****************************************************
       Page 4 of 5
   DIR Previous Page
   DIR Next Page