The PCN did not adequately identify the direction requirement (2026)

Case 2250597584 / 2025-12-16 / Adjudicator Edward Houghton

EAST KERB GOODWOOD RD JCT WITH NEW CROSS RD

“It is therefore defective and no penalty may be demanded on the basis of it.”

Edward Houghton

Transport for London issued the PCN at the junction of Goodwood Road and New Cross Road. The driver said they only understood, after returning to the location, that the allegation concerned a failure to comply with turn-left signs.

Edward Houghton considered that the type of sign alleged to have been contravened should be specified on the PCN. He explained that a photograph showing the sign face could adequately convey that information, but the notice in this case did not do so. On 16 December 2025, he allowed the appeal because the PCN did not adequately set out the grounds on which the penalty was demanded.

The decision was not based on the separate complaint about not receiving the authority's evidence. The adjudicator expressly said that he would not allow the appeal on the purely procedural issues raised. The decisive issue was the inadequacy of this notice's explanation of the allegation.

A representation on this point should identify the PCN's exact wording and explain what its images do or do not show. It should not assert that every Code 32 notice without a named turn or suffix is invalid. Read the notice as a whole and demonstrate the missing information that prevents the recipient understanding the alleged failure.

Source and case reference

Use case reference 2250597584 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.