Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hi all,

The 9 TFL PCNs all relate to the same permitted manoeuvre during September/October 2025 - driving from Havil Street, across Peckham Road, and into Vestry Road. All 9 PCNs were sent to my old address and therefore the first I heard of them was in April 2026, at my new address, when CDER Group delivered 9 letters demanding £325 for each PCN (£2,925 total!!).



The case is identical to https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/baffling-tfl-pcns/ - albeit they were able to appeal direct to TFL. As I was late to get the PCN I've missed this window. For background this is a route  that is commonly used by traffic and is something I or my wife do twice a day, every day. The fact that in a period of 2 years we have only been issued 9 PCNs suggests that clearly something wasn't working for a short period. The reasoning as to why I didn't get the original PCNs are that in April 2025 we sold our house. 3 days out from completion our onward purchase fell through. We scrambled for a rental place until December 2025 when we moved again and I updated my DVLA records. In that interim period we bought a house, changed car, and had our 2nd child, so DVLA record updates were not a priority!

Example of one of the CDER Group Letters: https://imgpile.com/p/gmXuI9L

I immediately submitted a PE2 and PE3 form for each of the PCNs in order to "wind back the clock" and go through what I felt would be a 'slam-dunk' appeal to TFL. Given the scale of the fine and the short notice before 'enforcement agent action' I admit I probably rushed this process and spent too long putting detail into the PE3 part (about evidence as to why the PCN should not have been issued in the first place).

Example of one of the PE2 Forms: https://imgpile.com/p/LO6evvk

As of 16/06/2026 these have been the responses so far:



The fact that TEC have accepted one of them gives me at least a glimmer of hope - but is this just a case of TFL missing one? The fact that the other 8 identical application were all rejected doesn't make any sense. Surely if one has been accepted then there is precedent that they should all be accepted if they're identical?

Now that most of them have been rejected I expect CDER group will be back on my case looking for money - I already paid £325 back in April to stop imminent 'enforcement action' as the PE2 forms weren't going to arrive soon enough (apparently I can claim this back in the PCN is overturned, but I'm not confident..). Is there any mechanism to put this action on hold pending complaints to TFL, other than an appeal to the TEC via something like an N244?

In summary: Have I exhausted my 'free' options with the TEC? The next appeal appears to be £123 per PCN! Could I submit just one of these, get the TEC rejection overturned and then use that as precedent for the others? Is there any hope in complaining to TFL directly about what is (or was) a faulty traffic camera on the junction? It can't be right that I'm being asked to pay nearly £3k for a TFL camera problem?!

Any advice really appreciated, thank you!

I agree with tincombe.

You can also ask:

I have to concur with Lexy here. The OP is in a mess of his own making by not updating his V5C Registration Address, hence not receiving any of the enforcement documents, V5 updating is a legal obligation as well. 

By all means do as Tincombe suggests, but if TfL decide to play hard ball, then the amount is outstanding, and is currently at the Compliance stage, where the bailiff fee is £75 (this is a statutory amount, BTW). If payment is not made, the bailiffs can visit premises and also seize "goods standing on the public highway", which essentially means any car owned by the OP. This incurs an additional fee of £235, (although this has recently increased by a small percentage).

We see similar situations on this forum regularly, and they rarely end well. Sorry to be so pessimistic, but it is important that the OP realises the situation is not good.

Stage 1 through to Ombudsman



(Although this refers to the TMA, I believe the same applies in your case)


As far as I am aware, this route is not open to you. The process is regulated and as far as we know that process has been followed to the letter. Your legal option as regards liability for the PCNs is prescribed and contained within regulations.

I think the fact that TFL can’t make their mind up on whether or not that is an allowable route isn’t entirely irrelevant here.

I don't follow. You now have the opportunity to test your ideas with the adjudicator(at least for travel in one of the directions), I suggest you pursue this as posted earlier. You must not let TfL let this matter slide which they could because serving a fresh PCN on you is only an option, it's not mandatory.

Yes. But I return to my previous point: don't be passive in this process. TfL can be tardy and time isn't on your side.

As I’ve said, this route is well used by traffic and we’ve been using it twice daily for more than two years.

Which, if the restrictions have been in place for some time could open up the defence of 'legitimate expectation'. (Look up 'legal defence of legitimate expectation'). But beware, you not knowing after the first PCN was issued is your fault and usually only works until you are notified of a change in practice i.e. the first PCN. The one in question here is the second in your sequence.