Lambeth PCN - Prohibition of certain types of vehicleCode 52 - Lingham Street Conflicting Signage

Hi,

I’d appreciate some advice on whether I have grounds to appeal this PCN.

I turned right from Stockwell Gardens into Lingham Street. At the junction there is a sign stating that motor vehicles are prohibited during School Street hours: 08:15–09:15 and 14:45–15:45, Monday to Friday.

Further down Lingham Street, before the camera/traffic filter, I saw another sign referring to the School Street hours. As it was approximately 14:34 when I passed through, I understood that the restriction was not in operation and continued through.

I’ve now received a 52m PCN for “failing to comply with a prohibition on certain types of vehicle (motor vehicles)”. I am likely to receive another PCN as I drove the same way later that day under the similar assumptions.

I’ve attached the PCN and a Google Maps image showing the signage at the entrance. Unfortunately, the second sign isn’t visible on the current Google Maps imagery.

Am I misunderstanding the restrictions here? Is there a separate 24-hour restriction at the traffic filter, and if so, do I have any grounds to appeal given the timed signage on the approach?

Thanks!

We need to see all pages of the PCN, with only name and address redacted, to check it for errors and also to see the video. This requires PCN Number and car registration.

GSV for April 2025 shows afternoon times starting at 2.45pm.They may have changed since, so if you can supply up-to-date photos it will save a lot of time conjecturing. GSV shows the restriction ends further down Lingham St, and the signs there show the same time

Looks like there is a relatively new LTN through traffic prohibition in the middle of Lingham street that you have fallen foul of, nothing to do with the timed school access.  If you go on their map, and select the speed and movement layer you can find and download the traffic order.

Can't read the VRM or PCN number - if you supply these there might be technical appeals.

Here are the other two pages of the PCN:





It’s PCN: LJ38789898
Registration: AU67VUB

Thanks

Restriction is now here: 

Video is front on and doesn't show the signs passed - might be an avenue for appeal, others more experienced may advise.

Here is the video of intersection:

Let's be clear, the PCN snapshot shows a vehicle exiting a 24/7 motor vehicles prohibited restricted area. As such it proves nothing.
 

However, your video presumably shows the entrance to this area.

So, on the face of it you passed those entrance signs.

But where we you supposed to go? Are there warning signs directing motor vehicles off Lingham before one gets to the restricted area?

Surely the bottom line is that the signs in GSV at both ends of this restriction show 2.45pm as the start of the restriction, but the OP h as a PCN with a photo showing the car exiting at the other end of the street and in contravention at 14.34.
We need to see those signs !

The OP's video shows the start of the 24/7 restriction, both ends look similar but there are distinguishing features that separate the council's video of them exiting from the OP's video of where it starts. OP, if I'm wrong then pl say.

If I am correct then perhaps....

I was driving along Lingham Street in a north-westerly direction towards Clapham Road at approx. 2.33 having turned right into Lingham Street from Stockwell Grn.

After approx. 100m I was, without warning, confronted by a 24/7 MOTOR VEHICLES PROHIBITED sign. There wasn't an exit from the road at that point and therefore I had no choice but to continue. The council's camera shows me exiting this zone at 2.34.

The background to these events is that the council has placed prescribed Pedestrian and Cycle zone signs at the junction of Lingham Street and Stockwell Grn which have effect Mon-Fri. 8.15 - 9.15; 2.45-3.45 therefore, having passed these at 2.32 I was travelling along an unrestricted length of road as regards moving traffic prohibitions. There are not any signs of the prescribed form terminating this zone. Despite this and for some reason best known to itself, the council has placed 24/7 MOTOR VEHICLES PROHIBITED signs within this part-time area.

This is conflicting, confusing and, I assert, unlawful. It therefore follows that any contravention purportedly arising from the presence of these signs is invalid.

The PCN must be cancelled.

The council should also address the presence of these signs and make up its mind whether it wants a full or part-time prohibition and of what type i.e. Pedestrian and Cycle or MOTOR VEHICLES prohibited.

Currently they are issuing premature charge certificates once a Notice of Rejection has been issued. A future bridge I accept.

Hi,

I’ve now received another PCN for the same alleged contravention, so there is quite a lot at stake if I challenge both.

It would be helpful to understand whether it’s worth making an informal challenge at this stage. In particular:

If I make an informal challenge, do I retain the option to pay the reduced penalty if the challenge is rejected?

Should I reference both PCNs in each challenge, given that they relate to the same location and circumstances?

Is there any argument that two PCNs for the same contravention within a relatively short period should be treated as a continuous contravention, rather than two separate penalties?

Thanks for any advice.

There is no informal challenge and they usually reoffer the discount.

Pl answer the question: does the video you took show the entrance to the 24/7 area and the council's video the exit?

Pl answer the question: does the video you took show the entrance to the 24/7 area and the council's video the exit?

Yes the video I took does show the enterance to the 24/7 area. Here is the picture. There is no whjere to turn through as mentioned before.



Do I have a case?

Thanks

IMO yes.

You start at the turn into Lingham which objectively reveals a part-time Pedestrian and Cycle zone. You entered when the prohibition was not in effect.

The next sign is your video which shows on the same road a new and 24/7 prohibition i.e. Motor Vehicles prohibited.

You passed these signs and were caught by the council's camera exiting.

IMO, the signage does not meet the legal test i.e. to introduce without warning on the same length of street such an onerous prohibition which leaves motorists no alternative than to stop in the road(there aren't any alternative)and perform U-turns.

Contravention did not occur would be my grounds.