Thanks for your kind response, Michael Browne. I guess I have a misconception that they must have bays/road markings in place, and that the entry sign must conform to a certain standard (I'm thinking of the standard Controlled Parking Zone signs which are massive).

I've realised that the images don't show up well here so I've added external links to help. Thanks. PCN Front: PCN Back: Other images available here: http://imageshack.com/a/img132/5347/e0kr.jpg http://imageshack.com/a/img843/4924/1iyp.jpg http://imageshack.com/a/img13/5536/k4xb.jpg

A few more images - hope it helps! Thanks.

Hey guys, I was issued a PCN today when I was visiting a customer On First Avenue in Manor Park (Newham Council, London). It appears that they've recently introduced a Residential Parking Zone in July 2013, and as I've previously parked here when there weren't any restrictions, I didn't realise. What made it worse was that there were no road markings (i.e. no bay markings, no single yellow lines etc.), and I had to drive back onto the start of the road to see a small sign indicating the parking zone, and then I realised there were more sign posts on the road. Don't get me wrong, I'm not here to complain about my own fault for not paying more attention, but given my previous visit and no obvious road markings, I just didn't think twice to check parking signs. The photos below make show what I mean. I've also uploaded a copy of the PCN. For all the experts and more knowledgeable people on here, I'm just wondering if there are any grounds for appeal. Thanks for any contributions to this post! Here is the link to Newham Council's website (under Manor Park section) regarding the parking zone. Here is the google maps link of the road. Any advice or guidance would be very much appreciated! Thanks in advance.

Hi all. I'm going to apologise first of all if I've posted this in the wrong place. It took me a while to put this new thread together so please offer any help you can, it would be greatly appreciated Situation: I have a Personal Loan for a laptop with the HFC bank taken out 29th Feb 2008 (Date of Agreement) bought from PC World. I have asked for an early settlement figure and they sent me a letter quoting the final amount required to settle the account. Let me summarise the loan details below: Loan Summary -Date of Agreement: 29/02/2008 -Settlement Date: 19/04/2010 -Amount borrowed: £399 -Opening Annual rate of Interest: 26.16% -Duration of Agreement: 48 months -PPI: No -Monthly Repayments: £13.52 p/m -Total charge for credit: Total amount payable over 48mths - Actual amount borrowed = (48*13.52) - £399 = £249.96 Don't know the APR, but it appears there were no "set up" fees or anything. So we can assume APR = 26.16% right? I have now paid 25 months of finance already. After requesting an early settlement figure, I was quoted £265.25 based on the Consumer Credit (Early Settlement) Regulations 2004. The breakdown is as follows: HFC settlement letter: Total amount Payable (before rebate): £325.91 Rebate for settlement of account by the Settlement Date above: £60.66 Therefore, amount required to settle this account: £265.25 Query: It seemed a bit too much. Now I did the calculations for myself using the formula (which can be found here http://www.opsi.gov.uk/SI/si2004/20041483.htm): where: A1 = 399 B1 = 13.52 r = 1.955378/100 m = 1 n = 25 a1 = 25 b1 = 24 b2 = 23 ... b24 = 1 b25 = 0 After plugging these figures into the above formula, we get: 399*(1.01955378^25) - (13.52*(1.01955378^24) + 13.52*(1.01955378^23) + .... 13.52*(1.01955378^1) + 13.52*(1.01955378^0)) I did the right hand side part of this calculation on Excel and it didn't take too long (Word version of it is attached, since .xls is not allowed) = 647.48 - 430.59 = £216.89 = Early Settlement Figure. I understand that things aren't always accurate down to the last penny, but for the difference to be nearly £50 using the same formula I just had to question it. Can someone please advise me if I have valid grounds, based on my calculations, to ask them to lower the settlement figure? Or are my figures totally wrong? Thank you for your time, it is greatly appreciated.

I'm going to draft up a letter and base my argument around the fact that it's not a dropped footway and it's not used for wheelchair users or pedestrians as theres no "dropped footway" on the other side. Any more to add guys? Thanks

Hi Crem. No there isn't a matching dropped kerb across the road.

Hello guys going to need your brains on this one. Alleged Offence: Code 27 "parked in a special enforcement area adjacent to a dropped footway" I have just got a PCN for parking adjacent to a dropped footway, but the so called "dropped footway" is not the usual dropped curb type. This dropped footway looks to be "dropped" because it used to be for an alleyway or to a driveway that's obviously no longer in existance. I have parked here many times before and even consulted many traffic wardens who said its fine to park there. So it was to my surprise when I found a PCN today for the alleged offence. What do you guys think? And how should I go about challenging this PCN? Thanks in advanced guys. :? sorry will re-up PCN images.. [/url]

Hi there hope you guys can give me some advice, I have read a number of threads about clamping on this forum but I haven't found what I'm looking for. I have been clamped and fined by a private firm called Elite Parking Enforcement Ltd on private land which had lots of signs posted up. It was £125 for release fee and £80 PCN, which totalled £205 to pay in order to be released!! At the time, because it was my first time being clamped, I didn't think to take any photos, although if required I could easily return (only local) and take some. To cut a long story short, i decided to pay by cash as there were problems with the card payment over the phone. As i got money out of the cash machine and returned to the clampers in their van, I thought I had to give them the PCN so that they can take down the details to issue me my receipt. The clamper told me that I could wait by my car and they would drive over to unclamp me. And so I did and he gave me my receipt but forgot to give me back the PCN and I also forgot to ask for it because I was so annoyed and also relieved to have the stupid clamp off. I spoke to my brother, who says that I should have got the PCN back or call them up to request a copy of it as they should have it. When i called them up, the lady on the phone said that she will get in touch with the guy who clamped me and ask. She then called me back and said that she spoke to her supervisor who told her "if you want to make an appeal you can do so by writing to us and quoting the reference number on your receipt, you don't need the PCN", so I replied by saying that I hadn't read the PCN properly and wanted to read it again to check. She then proceeded to say "Oh so you want to make an appeal based on your PCN?" which I answered by just repeating what I had said in the first place. She said she would call me back, which she never did and I presume they are closed now. I'm just thinking that if they don't issue me a copy of the PCN, what are my rights? How should I go about getting this? Clearly, I need the PCN back in order to see if I can get my money back! Please help me!! Thanks in advanced guys!

lol that's how I felt crem... it's silly that they still make it sound as if you were in the wrong. I might just leave it though, but the fact that traffic wardens have the cheek to issue a controversial PCN with the alleged contravention just ****es me off, when I clearly did not contravene!

Hey guys, great news! I received a letter back from Lambeth eventually due to the postal strike and all - they have cancelled it! Click the link below to view the letter. Anyway, I was wondering if there is any point in following this up with a complaint letter? Thanks guys. Lambeth Reply

Ahhh... perfect. Thanks Bernie.

Short and sharp draft letter - everything ok? Dear Sir or Madam I am writing to challenge the PCN with the reference number stated above on the grounds that the contravention with code 26E did not occur. I quote from section 85 of the Traffic Management Act 2004: Prohibition of double parking etc. (1) In a special enforcement area a vehicle must not be parked on the carriageway in such a way that no part of the vehicle is within 50 centimetres of the edge of the carriageway. It is very clear from the picture evidence enclosed that my vehicle was indeed within 50 centimetres of the edge of the carriageway. In light of this information, I would kindly ask you to use your discretion and cancel this PCN. I hope common sense prevails in this case because the alleged contravention did not occur. If this informal challenge is rejected, I would like to review the CEO’s photographic evidence and notes, and I will not hesitate to make a formal appeal to the adjudicator. Thank you very much for your assistance in this matter. Yours faithfully,

Thanks.

They are my pictures... sorry for not mentioning this earlier. I don't understand this one Bernie... can you explain? Also, I remember reading somewhere that if the PCN gets issued past 11pm, it reduces the time period that you're allowed to appeal or pay the fine, so the pcn is not valid? Is this correct or am I just plain wrong? Thanks.

Yes I have dude, thanks. As the photo of my car shows, the majority of the car is easily within 50cm... so I should appeal with " the contravention did not occur" right?

For the S.85 contravention to apply, my whole car must be 50cm away from the kerb? I will add these pictures to my appeal thanks. So I should appeal saying that the contravention did not occur? Thanks in advance buddy.

thanks, i'll take a look. No... just the front tyre was perhaps more than 50cm. I'll post more pictures of the incident once I get my camera back. Meanwhile, is the pcn valid? thanks guys, appreciated *edit* I have posted more images. Please take a look.

Hi guys, Once again I've received another PCN. This time i was parked outside a club in a dead end road on a single yellow line (past 11pm).. .and the alleged contravention was 26e: Vehicle parked more than 50cm from the edge of the carriageway and not within a designated parking place (double/parked obstruction). I parked on a curved kerb (no dropped footway), and because of this, my front was not too close to it. I will post the images soon, but I would appreciate advice on the PCN itself to see if it is valid. Thanks for any help guys! Here are the images of the PCN: http://img134.imageshack.us/i/lambethpcn.jpg/ http://img134.imageshack.us/i/lambethpcnback.jpg/ Front view of car Side view of car Close up view of front tyre *edit: image links fixed + new pictures*

Thanks green_and_mean, I'll look into that. There is certainly no dropped kerb on the opposite side of the road, as can be seen in the additional images. Do you have any views on the CCTV PCN contravention 01? I quote from article on theregister.co.uk: "The cameras fall foul of the Traffic Management Act of 2004 which only came into force in 2008...The TMA rules state that cameras must operate at 720 x 576 pixels - Westminster Council's only work at 704 x 576." Would this invalidate the PCN? Thanks!

Any ideas guys? I am mainly concerned with the PCN for contravention 27 (dropped kerb). Thanks!

Hey guys, happy Easter! This is my first time posting on here, although I have been visiting the site before. THANK YOU for your time in reading this post. Anyway, I have recently received 2 PCNs, both from Westminster Council, consisting of 1 through the post (CCTV) for contravention 01, and another stuck to my windscreen for contravention 27. I was wondering if I stood any chance of appealing against these two PCNs and if so, on what grounds? I have about a week left to make an informal representation (sorry for the delay), so ideally I would be sending off my appeal by Wednesday/Thursday...any quick inputs are highly valued! I have uploaded all sides to both the PCNs in 2 different galleries, please follow these links: CCTV PCN for Contravention 01 PCN for Contravention 27 Additional photos for contravention 27 *edit* (p.s.: to avoid any confusion, the black honda civic in my car, not the green one, and since the day of the contravention was a Sunday, parking on single yellow lines in Westminster was allowed) Regarding the CCTV PCN with contravention code 01 (parking on double yellow line), I'm not sure but I don't think I have a chance of appeal because I stopped on the double yellow line, and got out the car (to see a doctor for about 5 mins!), therefore I wasn't loading or unloading. However, I recently read about the CCTVs in Westminster being inadequate from here: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/parking-traffic-offences/192566-bbc-westminster-cctv-cameras.html Is there any ground to appeal against the CCTV PCN? Secondly, regarding the PCN with contravention code 27 (dropped kerb), I have uploaded additional images concerning the area and the dropped footway to give you guys a good visual image (some photos were taken a week later so my car wasn’t there anymore and someone else got a ticket!). I have checked the opposite side of the road and it is clear that there isn't another dropped kerb... so it leads me to conclude that the dropped footway seems to be for cyclists since there is a small area for cyclists to park up in the alley way. However, I didn't block the whole dropped footway but only my bumper blocked a small proportion of it (in one of the additional photos, I have marked where the dropped footway starts and ends), but still there is more than enough room for any bicycle to get past. In addition, I backed up as far as I could, since there was a resident bay behind me. Anyway, please take a look at the images I have attached, and any advice and feedback is very much appreciated! THANKS once again. - Ricky