The authority did not connect its sign photographs to the vehicle's route (2026)

Case 2250343859 / 2025-12-12 / Adjudicator Edward Houghton

Barnfield Road Between Watling Avenue And Burnt Oak Broadway

“On the evidence I am unable to be satisfied that the Appellant’s vehicle passed any sign which might indicate he was entering a one-way street.”

Edward Houghton

The PCN concerned Barnfield Road between Watling Avenue and Burnt Oak Broadway. The motorist said they had joined from Back Lane without visible signs informing them of the one-way restriction. Barnet supplied a plan and photographs, including a sign described as facing motorists leaving a car park.

Edward Houghton could not locate that car park on the plan. Other photographs showed left and right arrows said to be at the junction with Barnfield Road, but the evidence did not clarify which the vehicle had passed or how they related to the car-park image. He adjourned the case and asked the authority to mark the vehicle's CCTV position and relevant signs on its plan. The motorist was also asked to explain their route and photograph positions.

Neither party responded. The appeal was allowed on 12 December 2025 because the authority had not discharged its burden of proving the case. The adjudicator could not be satisfied that the vehicle had passed a sign indicating entry into a one-way street. This was a gap in the route evidence, not a finding that every sign at the location was absent or that a car-park exit automatically creates an exemption.

For a comparable appeal, connect each photograph to a marked entry point and direction of travel. Explain which sign faced the vehicle and where it was encountered. Respond to a tribunal's request for clarification: the fact that this appeal succeeded after both parties failed to respond is not a reason to leave your own route unexplained.

Source and case reference

Use case reference 2250343859 in the London Tribunals register to find the official decision. This commentary distinguishes the adjudicator's finding from a possible argument in a different case; previous tribunal decisions do not bind another adjudicator.