Free Traffic Legal Advice

I had to look after a friends cat recently as her cattery was fully booked. I have received 8 x penalties over 4 days, 2 per day most of them 1 minute apart for entering pedestrian zone between the school hours of 2.45pm and 3.45pm. I did not see any notices for this and have driven down these roads in the past and never had penalties.  I can see from this forum it has happened to others in the past. I appealed and my appeal was rejected of course! They want 8 x fines of £130 totalling £1040 unless I pay within 14 days and then it will reduce to £520. I apologised in my appeal saying it was a genuine mistake and if the signs had been visible I would not have driven down there and that I had also recently lost my mother and on medication for my mental health. Is there anything I can do?

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

It doesn't look good, I'm afraid. Here is the advance sign on Dermody Road that you drove down to turn right into Leahurst Road : -
https://maps.app.goo.gl/HVwLye8x6Ko7e8iA8
and here are the restriction signs themselves, mounted far too high in my view but they get away with it, I'm afraid.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/R9koUaiVLiKQmBvGA

You may well have driven along Leahurst Road in the past without penalty, (1) the restriction has only been there since the GSV view of September 2022, and (2) you drove down there outside the restricted times.

What I suggest you do is list here the PCNs and their date, and date received. Representations have been won in the past based on the appellant only becoming aware of the restriction on receiving the first PCN on a certain date, with the others dated after PCN 1, but not being received until PCN 1 arrived.

There may be other representation and appeal arguments based on Lewisham mismanagement of the enforcement process, so wait a bit to see what is suggested.

1. This is a disproportionate number of PCNs. At a different location I got 24 ot of 24 cancelled AFAIR.

2. Please screenshot every PCN payment status on their website and report back as there may well be a problem.

I advise going to the Tribunal and am happy to represent you.

As above, please fill in the blanks.

i am not very good at how to post screenshots onto here? (too old can anyone advise me how I can do it? thank you

I will take a look but I need every single PCN detail please. I have a case against them shortly on this same issue.

This was the rejection letter.

I have dealt with this one and deal will with the others later today. In direct contact with the OP.

https://www.ftla.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4877.0;attach=11261

Ticket ReferenceZY11627646

Served byPost
The amount outstanding on the Penalty Charge Notice will increase to £130.00 on Thu, 6 Feb 2025. Please pay £65.00 now.

You have already made representations for this PCN and we replied on Thu, 23 Jan 2025. You cannot make representations twice

              225006218A and 2250094845.  Phew!  More to follow as Lewisham wrote rather vexatious statements about me.

If you forgive the pun, this is somewhat catastrophic for the council. 

@HeatherMS it has been an absolute pleasure to work with you and thank you for trusting me and your kind words. We were lucky with the lottery system! A costs application to follow and Press.    As you know, they made some rather vexatious comments about me.

The website issues were/are as follows:

1. Incorrect projected dates of increase before making representations and incorrect date of issue of PCNs. Website states the PCN issue was the same as the date of the captured contravention whereas the actual issue date was 3 days later i.e. the date of the PCNs. The highlighted/emboldened box stating PAY NOW.

2. Truncation of period of 14 day discount period in the NORs since the council did not take into account the deemed served issue in their calculations.

I referred to 2240362722 in this regard, save for the final part of Mr Houghton's decision pertaining to the final threats to increase to £195, which Lewisham have removed. Yes we were lucky with the choice of Adjudicator. Another would not have entertained the collateral arguments, as we know.