Skip to content

Lambeth, code 53j, failing to comply with a restriction on vehicles entering a p

7453 Views 29 Replies

0 Members and 43 Guests are viewing this topic.

#16
I make these formal representations against PCN

1. There was no contravention of a prescribed order because the signage in situ and accompanying plate a place directly after the turn on Rosendale Road, there is no advance signage to warn that this restriction is upcoming and by the time one is in a position to see the signs it is too late. Indeed, reading the exemption plate placed as it is impossible from a moving vehicle and to stop at the location in question would be inherently dangerous as would attempting to reverse back.

For these reasons the signage fails in its requirement under LATOR 1996 s18 to adequately inform the motorist.

2. A motorist must be given wholly correct information when to pay the reduced or full amounts sought. However, there is a clear disconnect between the law and what is stated on your website.

In light of the above, please cancel the PCN



@Incandescent!

I AM ABLE TO TAKE ON MORE CASES AS A REPRESENTATIVE AT THE LONDON TRIBUNALS. I HATE RETIREMENT.


If you do not challenge, you join "The Mugged Club".

cp8759 and mrmustard are true geniuses. I know my place in the hierarchy of The Three Musketeers. 😊 "The Clinician", "The Gentleman" and "The Showman"

There are "known knowns" which we may never have wished to know. This applies to them. But in the field the idea that there are also "unknown unknowns" doesn't apply as they hide in the aleatoric lottery. I know this is true and need to be prepared knowing the "unknown unknowns" may well apply.

To Socrates from "Hippocrates"
#17
I make these formal representations against PCN

1. There was no contravention of a prescribed order because the signage in situ and accompanying plate a place directly after the turn on Rosendale Road, there is no advance signage to warn that this restriction is upcoming and by the time one is in a position to see the signs it is too late. Indeed, reading the exemption plate placed as it is impossible from a moving vehicle and to stop at the location in question would be inherently dangerous as would attempting to reverse back.

For these reasons the signage fails in its requirement under LATOR 1996 s18 to adequately inform the motorist.

2. A motorist must be given wholly correct information when to pay the reduced or full amounts sought. However, there is a clear disconnect between the law and what is stated on your website.

In light of the above, please cancel the PCN


Thank you. I have sumbbitted the representation as you stated. Once i receive a response i will reply back.

thank you for the support. (lets hope for the best).

 
Like Like x 1 View List
#18
Can't wait.  :o
@Incandescent!

I AM ABLE TO TAKE ON MORE CASES AS A REPRESENTATIVE AT THE LONDON TRIBUNALS. I HATE RETIREMENT.


If you do not challenge, you join "The Mugged Club".

cp8759 and mrmustard are true geniuses. I know my place in the hierarchy of The Three Musketeers. 😊 "The Clinician", "The Gentleman" and "The Showman"

There are "known knowns" which we may never have wished to know. This applies to them. But in the field the idea that there are also "unknown unknowns" doesn't apply as they hide in the aleatoric lottery. I know this is true and need to be prepared knowing the "unknown unknowns" may well apply.

To Socrates from "Hippocrates"
#19
Can't wait.  :o

Dear Hippocrates,
I have an odd update retgarding this case. I have not formally received a response on my representation but:

- 9 Jan I sumbitted the representation
- 18 Feb I got another letter with the same PCN
- 24 Feb I checked the lambeth portal and the site was saying that representation has been received
- 13 Mar I checked the lambeth portal again and it now says to pay full amount or it will increase to £240 on 29March.

What do i do? Do i make new represenations again?

new screens on links below.


imgpile.com

imgpile.com


Last Edit: March 13, 2026, 03:13:19 pm by msym
#20
I'll take a look later as Lambeth's brains operate in mysterious ways.
@Incandescent!

I AM ABLE TO TAKE ON MORE CASES AS A REPRESENTATIVE AT THE LONDON TRIBUNALS. I HATE RETIREMENT.


If you do not challenge, you join "The Mugged Club".

cp8759 and mrmustard are true geniuses. I know my place in the hierarchy of The Three Musketeers. 😊 "The Clinician", "The Gentleman" and "The Showman"

There are "known knowns" which we may never have wished to know. This applies to them. But in the field the idea that there are also "unknown unknowns" doesn't apply as they hide in the aleatoric lottery. I know this is true and need to be prepared knowing the "unknown unknowns" may well apply.

To Socrates from "Hippocrates"
#22
Sorry to go back on this, but have you actually received a PCN in your name from Lambeth?

Hello, valid point.
The first one was from the lease company that was accompanied with a  3rd party authorisation letter. I had assumed that this transferred the responsibility to me. Is that not the case. If this is indeed the issue then do I just make the same representations?

Thank you,
Marios
#23
IMO, you may not make reps in your own name, unless you have a PCN in your own name.

You have no liability to the council if a PCN has not been issued to you. The most you are doing is the leg work for the RK.

The RK cannot 'transfer' liability under the guise of them having a hire agreement with you because there is no such agreement which BY LAW has to be of a prescribed form AND have a term no longer than 6 months.
#24
IMO, you may not make reps in your own name, unless you have a PCN in your own name.

You have no liability to the council if a PCN has not been issued to you. The most you are doing is the leg work for the RK.

The RK cannot 'transfer' liability under the guise of them having a hire agreement with you because there is no such agreement which BY LAW has to be of a prescribed form AND have a term no longer than 6 months.


thank you for the response. WHat does this mean in practive? the second letter of this PCN is now under my name. Does this mean the first represenation was void and as such i need to go thorugh the process again?

Regards,
Marios
#26
the second letter of this PCN is now under my name

Sorry, but what 'letter'? Pl post.

Hello, please see below.
imgpile.com

imgpile.com


This is the one I received under my name.
There is another one that the lease company had received which is almost identical with the exception of the addressee and the date of penalty charge notice.

Thank you for the support
#28
the second letter of this PCN is now under my name

Sorry, but what 'letter'? Pl post.

Hello, please see below.
imgpile.com

imgpile.com


This is the one I received under my name.
There is another one that the lease company had received which is almost identical with the exception of the addressee and the date of penalty charge notice.

Thank you for the support
I'll take a look later as Lambeth's brains operate in mysterious ways.


Hi both, Do you have any advice please? I can make the same representations again to stop the clock for the fees going further up. I am also consious that at another thread, a very similar response got rejected for the same place.


thank you
#29
I'll take a look later as Lambeth's brains operate in mysterious ways.

IMO, you may not make reps in your own name, unless you have a PCN in your own name.

You have no liability to the council if a PCN has not been issued to you. The most you are doing is the leg work for the RK.

The RK cannot 'transfer' liability under the guise of them having a hire agreement with you because there is no such agreement which BY LAW has to be of a prescribed form AND have a term no longer than 6 months.


Dear Hippocrates, tincombe

I am still stuggling with this PCN. Any advice is greatly appreciated.

I have summarised the situation below again as there is too much history to follow:

PCN: LJ35493793


I got the PCN on 17/12/2025 for a contravention that occurred on 5/12/2026 on a lease car.
imgpile.com

imgpile.com

imgpile.com

imgpile.com


On 22/12/2025 I got a third party authorisation letter from the leasing company:
imgpile.com

https://imgpile.com/p/x0vt3dO#kpoxG5F
https://imgpile.com/p/x0vt3dO#obvmRFK

On 7/1/2026 I got a screenshot from their portal stating : “The amount outstanding on the Charge Notice will increase to £160.00 very soon. Please pay £80.00 now.”
https://imgpile.com/p/avYqDXs

On 9/1/2026 I submitted the challenge as per Hippocrates guidance.

On 24/2/2026 I checked their portal and stated:
“The amount outstanding on the Charge Notice will increase to £160.00 on Tue 10 Mar 2026. Please pay £80.00 now.”
“ We received your representation on and we will reply in due course. You do not need to make representations again.”
https://imgpile.com/p/NuhoA98#dhfxJ4S

On 13/3/2026 I checked their porta and stated:
“The amount outstanding on the Charge Notice will increase to £240.00 on Sunday 29 Mar 2026. Please pay £160.00 now”
https://imgpile.com/p/NuhoA98#n66nGqj


This is when I realised that previously it was still under the leasing companies name and not under my name.


On 27/3/2026 I resubmitted the challenge with the following text

make these formal representations against PCN
1. There was no contravention of a prescribed order because the signage in situ and accompanying plate a place
directly after the turn on Rosendale Road, there is no advance signage just before the turn to warn that this
restriction is upcoming and by the time one is in a position to see the signs it is too late. Indeed, reading the
exemption plate placed as it is impossible from a moving vehicle and to stop at the location in question would be
inherently dangerous as would attempting to reverse back.

For these reasons the signage fails in its requirement under LATOR 1996 s18 to adequately inform the motorist.

2. A motorist must be given wholly correct information when to pay the reduced or full amounts sought. However,
there is a clear disconnect between the law and what is stated on your website, noting that the website has been
inconsistent and changing conent from time to time.
In light of the above, i would request to cancel the PCN.


On 18/5/2026 I received the rejection notice from the council with a long explanation as to why and with an appeal code if I want to appeal further.

On the letter it states that if after 28 days  I have taken no action then they will send a Charge Certificate increasing the fee from £160 to £240. This should then be this coming Monday 15 June.
It also states that I have 28 days to appeal.

https://imgpile.com/p/LYJfR7K#gallery-3

On 08/06/2026 I received a letter from the Lambeth Council stating that the penalty charge has not been paid and has now increased to £240.

https://imgpile.com/p/LYJfR7K#gallery-2

Oddly enough, this is not after the 28days as states in the previous letter


On 13/06/2026 I looked at the website and states
"The amount outstanding on the Penalty Charge Notice is £240.00. If the Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) remains unpaid the charge may be registered as a debt with the Northampton County Court Traffic Enforcement Centre. This will result in a debt registration fee of £10 being added to the outstanding balance. Please pay £240.00 by Thu, 25 Jun 2026.
You have already made a representation for this PCN, and we replied on Sat, 16 May 2026. Please refer to our previous letter for the next steps. The current amount outstanding is £240.00."

https://imgpile.com/p/LYJfR7K#gallery-1


Interestingly the letter states 18 May but the website states 16 May.



Can you please advice and support me with next steps? Based on my understanding from previous discussions, I should have good grounds to appeal on the basis that the website and letters are not aligned.
I would appreciate if you can respond on next steps as the last day to appeal is Monday.


Thank you in advance
[/pre][/pre]
Last Edit: June 13, 2026, 09:29:18 pm by msym
#30
E mail me please as per my PM with all the documents and where we are. Do not do anything.
@Incandescent!

I AM ABLE TO TAKE ON MORE CASES AS A REPRESENTATIVE AT THE LONDON TRIBUNALS. I HATE RETIREMENT.


If you do not challenge, you join "The Mugged Club".

cp8759 and mrmustard are true geniuses. I know my place in the hierarchy of The Three Musketeers. 😊 "The Clinician", "The Gentleman" and "The Showman"

There are "known knowns" which we may never have wished to know. This applies to them. But in the field the idea that there are also "unknown unknowns" doesn't apply as they hide in the aleatoric lottery. I know this is true and need to be prepared knowing the "unknown unknowns" may well apply.

To Socrates from "Hippocrates"