Would welcome feedback on the below:
Dear Sirs
I would like to take my right to appeal PCN GX28953973. My challenge was rejected on 19 September 2025. However, my notification of rejection was received by post on 30 September 2025, 10 days into my appeal window.
My grounds for appeal are as follows.
1. No contravention based on no road signs stating that the road user cannot turn into Vestry Road.
For the avoidance of doubt, I would like to clear my journey started from Havil Street, SE5, where I drop off and pick up my two children from the Havil Street entrance of Sunshine Fruits Montessori Nursery on Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Friday. This has been the case since my elder child joined in October 2022. Please see evidence A for confirmation my children attend the nursery and were present on the day of the PCN.
The light system where Havil Street meets the Peckham Road is clear. There is no left turn on to Peckham Road. Please see evidence B. There are no other signs for road users. For the avoidance of doubt, there are no signs saying that people leaving Havil Street cannot turn into Vestry Road.
2. Clear indication to drivers they can enter Vestry Road from Havil Street.
While the absence of a sign saying no left turn into Vestry Road is my fundamental and conclusive reason why I have not performed a contravention, I would also point to the wider absence of signs / information, only endorsing the view as a driver that you are operating legally and appropriately in making this manoeuvre left into Vestry Road from Havil Street.
Firstly, there is a clear place you would expect to see a sign saying no left turn, to make explicit that this is not allowed, namely the lamp post just before turning into Vestry Road. There is nothing. Please see evidence C.
Thirdly, the light system that joins Havil Street, Vestry Road and Peckham Road is clear that road users driving along the Peckham Road, and waiting at the lights either side of the junction cannot take a left or right into Vestry Road or Havil Street. Therefore, there is no other point of entry to these two-way streets.
If users of Havil Street and Vestry Road were not allowed to cross between the two, logically there is no point of entry remaining so they would be one-way. They are not.
3. Incorrect evidence from TFL to overturn my challenge.
TFL base their reason for my challenge being rejected as the fact I should have seen the clear no left turn signs from the light system at the Peckham Road/Havil Street/Vestry Road junction.
The signs they have sent are only visible to a road user who is driving towards these lights from Peckham Road, not a road user approaching the lights from Havil Street. Please see evidence D with the photo they sent me of proof of signs, as mentioned taken from a perspective that is not true for a Havil Street user and the paragraph of the letter clearly citing this sign – which is not applicable in my case – as their reason.
Please note, in the photo in evidence D you can see the side profile of the lights that were visible to me and carry different signs, namely just one sign saying no left turn onto Peckham Road. In addition, you can see in the photo the road sign for Havil Road, underpinning I would not have visibility of these signs on exiting.
For the avoidance of any doubt, the online photo evidence they sent also shows a photo of my car crossing while the cars on Peckham Road wait behind their red light, again removing any confusion that I was coming from this direction, and confirming I was pulling out from Havil Street. Please see evidence E. I also clarify my route and the place a car would need to be to see TFL’s evidence in evidence F.
4. Lights on Peckham Road obscured by lamp post.
Given the confusion this situation has caused me, I also want to ensure I have tied up any other loose ends that could be claimed as the rationale for my contravention.
On this front, for the avoidance of doubt if the second road sign, at the second set of lights holding traffic moving from Camberwell – Peckham down the Peckham Road was meant to be the indication a left hand turn was not permitted, this is unacceptable as for a road user leaving Havil Street, these signs are obscured by a lamp post. Please see evidence G.
As the following regulation that you will be aware of says, TFL is obliged to provide adequate signage of the restriction under Regulation 18 of the The Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1996/2489/regulation/185. My conclusions.
As mentioned, I have driven this route for over three years. I have never once received a PCN prior to 01 September 2025. However, my clear assumption is new cameras went in on this date that are mis calibrating to sometimes report cars coming from Havil Street as performing a contravention.
The rejection I received only endorses the view that TFL are basing their charge on the fact I was driving from the Peckham Road side of the light system, vs. coming from Havil Street, despite me being explicitly clear in my challenge.
I would add that I see cars and bikes every single day cross from Havil Street to Vestry Road. If this is not allowed, there must be an issue with signs, given the number of road users who are and continue to take this route.
I have also asked other parents at nursery who asserted their view this is not a prohibited turn and interestingly, they have not been received PCNs for driving the route. Similarly, some, not all of my drives have resulted in a PCN so I am wondering if it is based on the angle you approach Vestry Road from as to whether the camera incorrectly picks your car up.
6. Further important information.
My PCN as challenged here captures an alleged contravention on 01 September 2025 but was not issued to me until 11 September 2025, and received by me on 16 September 2025. During this window, I continued to drive my normal nursery route unaware I was about to become the recipient of manifold PCNs during this window. I have only received a rejection for GX28953973 currently. The other 6 are under review and I have updated my challenge to note the incorrect assumptions made in rejecting this one.
Should the rest also get rejected, I will want to factor this angle into my appeal.
Thank you for your time and I look forward to speaking in person.
