DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: The Flame Pit
*****************************************************
#Post#: 106125--------------------------------------------------
PCN appeal accepted - my concerns about potential fraud - infra
red V daylight images, cloning
By: blovers Date: January 16, 2026, 3:04 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I received a PCN with online 'evidence' only, showing a Seat
entering a restricted Low Traffic Neighbourhood. The Seat was a
different model and colour to mine and my appeal was granted.
The video in good daylight shows a car with no apparent number
plate turning into a prohibited road. There is a very dark
infra-red image which shows a rear plate number matching mine,
appearing above where the plate is usually mounted. I've masked
much of the plate in the IR image.
[img width=640
height=348]
HTML https://i.ibb.co/XrjfYYvg/car-in-PCN-video-2025-12-11-15-33-38.png[/img]
[img width=640
height=348]
HTML https://i.ibb.co/b5pJbt7P/Screenshot-A.png[/img]
[img width=539
height=363]
HTML https://i.ibb.co/dwwKPChY/IR-plate-section.png[/img]
IR imaging is valuable at night or where there is glare from
headlights or sunlight.
I this instance it was bright but flat daylight - not
night-time, no headlights, no glare.
The number plates of vehicles parked further away are visible to
some degree.
Is such a discrepency between the daylight and IR image
reasonable?
My concern is that this could be open to abuse in terms of a PCN
business pixelating out a regular plate of a permit holder and
inserting a number from a car captured by ANPR in the
neighbourhood.
It also seems odd to me for the following reasons:
It happened on a rare day I was close to the junction.
Statistically odd.
The PCN did not include any images - usually they do - was the
PCN business aware that this wasn't my car, hoping I would just
pay rather than look at the online evidence - many people just
pay i beleive.
Why would someone using a cloned plate, aparently not have any
plate visible in daylight? This would attract more attention
than having a cloned plate.
Why would someone using a cloned plate install one that shows in
IR images?
Why would someone clone the number plate of a different model
and colour to that of their own car?
This is such a grey area of plausable deniability.
I've asked for the original videos and images.
I would be interested in any comments on the IR/daylight images,
cloning & potential fraud by this PCN business.
Many thanks
#Post#: 106138--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN appeal accepted - my concerns about potential fraud - in
fra red V daylight images, cloning
By: Southpaw82 Date: January 16, 2026, 5:06 am
---------------------------------------------------------
What is a “PCN business”?
#Post#: 106150--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN appeal accepted - my concerns about potential fraud - in
fra red V daylight images, cloning
By: andy_foster Date: January 16, 2026, 5:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
And what is the relevance of the subjective concept of
reasonableness?
#Post#: 106177--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN appeal accepted - my concerns about potential fraud - in
fra red V daylight images, cloning
By: blovers Date: January 16, 2026, 8:27 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Southpaw82 link=topic=9519.msg106138#msg106138
date=1768561591]
What is a “PCN business”?
[/quote]
Penalty Charge Notices are managed by a business contracted by
my local council.
Most businesses maximise profit opportunities - I have appealed
several PCNs recently in North London, which were accepted. My
experience is that I am being issued more PCNs which are
marginal, based on my fact based experience.
#Post#: 106178--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN appeal accepted - my concerns about potential fraud - in
fra red V daylight images, cloning
By: blovers Date: January 16, 2026, 8:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=andy_foster link=topic=9519.msg106150#msg106150
date=1768564308]
And what is the relevance of the subjective concept of
reasonableness?
[/quote]
Reasonableness - if these two images are of the same car and are
not manipulated, then reasonableness would suggest many other
people have had a similar discrepency between daylight and IR
images. Hopefully those people will comment accordingly.
Reasonableness - a measure of whether a matter can be reasoned.
Is it reasonable to accpet that these two images were taken at
the same time and location - can a reason be given as to why no
normal number plate of any can kind can be discerned in the
daylight image, whilst the IR image shows a number plate.
#Post#: 106247--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN appeal accepted - my concerns about potential fraud - in
fra red V daylight images, cloning
By: sparx Date: January 16, 2026, 7:35 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The data block on both images make them from the same episode,
and the third image would appear to just be a zoomed cropped
version of the 2nd image.
The plate may well not be visible on a standard camera just
based upon the angle, or if it is a cloned plate, perhaps some
kind of coating/reflective treatment on it to make it more
difficult to read?
#Post#: 106297--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN appeal accepted - my concerns about potential fraud - in
fra red V daylight images, cloning
By: stamfordman Date: January 17, 2026, 12:08 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
What the details - I'd like to check if it's still online.
There is no prospect of fraud by authorities so this will be a
technical issue.
*****************************************************