Example: Bus Lane PCN Appeal — Missing Warning Signs
Summary
This example shows a formal representation to a London council against a bus lane PCN captured by camera enforcement. The driver turned left from a side road directly into the bus lane with no advance warning sign visible from that approach. The letter argues that TSRGD 2016 Diagram 878.1 requires advance camera warning signs on each approach, and that the sign was only positioned on the main road approach — not the side road. It cites London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003 on procedural requirements and requests the council produce its sign maintenance log and the Traffic Management Order text.
The situation
You turned left from a residential side road onto a main road. Within 30 metres, you were in an active bus lane captured by camera enforcement. No advance camera warning sign was visible from the side road approach. The only Diagram 878.1 sign was 200 metres back on the main road, facing traffic coming from the opposite direction.
Legal grounds used
Ground 1: TSRGD 2016, Diagram 878.1 — camera enforcement signs must provide advance warning on the approach to the restriction. No sign was visible from the side road approach. Vine v Waltham Forest LBC [2000] — a driver exercising ordinary care must be able to ascertain the restriction. Ground 2: Traffic Management Act 2004, Schedule 7 — the council must comply with procedural requirements including adequate signage before enforcing via camera.
How the letter argues the case
The letter identifies the PCN, describes the exact approach route, and explains why the warning sign was not visible from that direction. It includes a hand-drawn map showing the side road junction, the bus lane start point, and the camera warning sign location. The letter puts the council to strict proof that signage was adequate for all approaches and requests disclosure of the TMO, the sign maintenance schedule, and any site inspection reports. The tone is formal and precise — no narrative about unfairness, only factual and legal argument.
Get a letter like this for your situation
This is an example of the kind of appeal letter GetRighted generates. Every letter is tailored to your specific circumstances — your operator, your location, your evidence, and the legal grounds that apply to your case.
Why detailed letters matter
Appeals citing specific legislation and evidence have significantly higher success rates than generic template letters. At POPLA, around 40–50% of appeals succeed overall, but well-evidenced appeals with legal citations win more often. Source: POPLA published statistics.
Sources
- TSRGD 2016, Diagram 878.1
- Vine v Waltham Forest LBC [2000] 1 WLR 2383
- Traffic Management Act 2004, Schedule 7
Frequently Asked Questions
- Is this a real appeal letter?
- This is an exemplar — a hand-crafted example showing the quality and structure of GetRighted's appeal letters. Your letter would be tailored to your specific situation.
- Will my letter cite the same legislation?
- Your letter cites whichever legislation applies to your case. If your ticket involves signage issues, it will cite the BPA Code and Beavis. If it involves late notice, it will cite POFA 2012, Schedule 4.
- How long does it take to get my letter?
- After you submit your ticket details and evidence, GetRighted generates your appeal letter within minutes. You can then review, download, and send it.
Related
- inadequate-signage-traffic
- missing-camera-warning
- tmo-defect
Got a ticket? Find out if you can win.
GetRighted checks your situation against all known defenses — free in under 2 minutes.
Check My Ticket