Unclear entry times and an incorrect rejection undermined the PCN (2026)

Case 2250427438 / 2025-12-29 / Adjudicator Carl Teper

Sydney Road

“it is not possible to see the times of the restriction on the CCTV footage provided to the Tribunal.”

Carl Teper

This appeal concerned a vehicle entering Sydney Road on 7 July 2025 at 14:32. The London Borough of Redbridge relied on a pedestrian-zone restriction. The motorist questioned the accuracy of the restriction, placing the operating times directly in issue.

Carl Teper found that the restriction times could not be seen in the CCTV and that the authority had not supplied a clear photograph of the entrance sign. A warning sign alone was insufficient. The Notice of Rejection also said the afternoon restriction began at 2:40 pm, later than the recorded entry, and ended at 3:30 pm. The adjudicator treated this as a serious error that had caused an unnecessary appeal.

The case summary did not correct the timing error. The adjudicator could discover the correct afternoon timing only by reading the experimental traffic management order. He also found the signage at the entrance unclear and unreadable. On 29 December 2025, the appeal was allowed for the reasons set out in the decision.

This was not a ruling that entry at 14:32 was necessarily outside the actual restriction. The incorrect time appeared in the authority's rejection; the order contained the correct time. The useful comparison is between the recording, a legible image of the entrance sign, the operative order and the explanation given to the motorist. Identify each inconsistency rather than treating the rejection's mistaken time as the legal restriction.

Source and case reference

Use case reference 2250427438 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.