Author Topic: **PCN Lambeth - 53J - multiple PCNs before first notice received / proportionality**  (Read 1873 times)

0 Members and 30 Guests are viewing this topic.

Hi, I’m looking for some advice on multiple PCNs I’ve received from Lambeth for entering a pedestrian/school street zone on Sunnyhill Road.

I’ve recently received my first PCN (reduced to £80), but it was issued around 10–11 days after the contravention date. During that time, I continued to drive through the same road daily to get to work, completely unaware of the restriction.

I now realise this is a timed school street restriction, but the signage is positioned right at the turn, so I didn’t notice it at the time. I am also not from the local area.

Because the first PCN arrived late, I have unknowingly committed the same contravention multiple times before I had any opportunity to change my behaviour.

I’m concerned I could now receive multiple PCNs for the same mistake, potentially amounting to a large total I cannot afford.

My questions are:

* Can I argue “continuous contravention” or that multiple PCNs are disproportionate since I wasn’t aware of the restriction before receiving the first notice?
* Has anyone had success getting additional PCNs cancelled in similar circumstances?

For context, I have now stopped using the road during restricted hours as soon as I became aware.

Any advice would be really appreciated.

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


Please show us the PCN and VRM details and screenshot the website re all payments and dates periods as shown for starters.
@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"

Here's a link to the details and screenshot:

Screenshot is missing the vital information: the price, the date of increase and your proof of date of the shot.

We win cases because of this.
@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"

apologies, updated link includes the price and discounted price as well as proof of screen shot time in the top right

:
Like Like x 1 View List

There is  no need and no help to us in obscuring the VRM and PCN details.
@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"

third times a charm:

Update 4 more pcn's have arrived as suspected, same road, so £400 total now.

Hoping i can argue continuous contravention.

any advice ?

Yes. You wrote this in your initial post:-
Quote
* Can I argue “continuous contravention” or that multiple PCNs are disproportionate since I wasn’t aware of the restriction before receiving the first notice?
* Has anyone had success getting additional PCNs cancelled in similar circumstances?

YOu cannot argue "continuous contravention"; that applies to parking where a car remains at the same spot for several days and gets several PCNs, but even then this argument can sometimes fail to succeed. What you can argue is that until the first PCN arrived by post, you were unaware of committing the contraventions. So you could argue that {CNs dated between the date of the first PCN, and the date it arrived are disproportionate, and unfair. SOme councils will agree to cancel such PCNs on the basis you pay the first one. Others, being venal and rapacious, insist all be paid. Then if you take the matter to London Tribunals, success is not guaranteed either, and this time it is with the full PCN penalties in play.

So to handle this as a representation, you need to group them together into a single representation, and request the PCNs between the date of the first and the date the first one arrived, be cancelled.


Hi all, I’m looking for some advice as a follow-up to my situation, as things have now progressed and I’m unsure on the best course of action.

I previously posted about receiving multiple PCNs from Lambeth for driving through a pedestrian/school street restriction on Sunnyhill Road. The first contravention occurred on 27th February 2026 at 15:35, but the first PCN was only received around 9th March. During that period, I continued to use the road, so any further contraventions occurred before I had any opportunity to change my behaviour.

Following the advice given here, I submitted informal challenges for all PCNs, explaining that I was unaware of the restriction at the time and that all contraventions took place before I received the first PCN. I also explained that the total amount is more than I can afford to live on for the month, and I provided evidence of this.

I have now received a rejection for the first PCN, which appears to be a standard/template response. It focuses only on the signage being clear and does not address the key point that all subsequent contraventions occurred before I had any opportunity to modify my behaviour. It also does not acknowledge the financial evidence I provided or offer any form of payment arrangement.

At the moment this rejection is only for the first PCN, but I have already received 4 further PCNs for the same location, and I can only assume the others will be rejected in a similar way.

For clarity:

* First contravention date: 27/02/2026 at 15:35
* First PCN received: approximately 09/03/2026
* Additional PCNs: 4 further PCNs already received, all for the same location and all occurring before I became aware of the restriction

As soon as I received the first PCN, I stopped using the road during restricted hours.

From the advice in my previous thread, I understand this is not “continuous contravention” in the strict sense, but rather an argument that enforcing multiple PCNs in these circumstances is disproportionate, as I had no opportunity to change my behaviour before being notified.

This is already unaffordable for me and does not seem proportionate to the nature of the contravention. I did provide evidence of my financial situation, but I don’t feel this has been considered at all.

Given this, I would really appreciate advice on:

1. Is it worth pursuing formal representations (and potentially tribunal) for all PCNs on the basis of proportionality?
2. If i am forced to pay all 5 pcns, is there any ways to spread the cost or ways in which there is support for someone in my financial situation?

I am conscious of the 14-day discount period for the first PCN, so any guidance on the best approach from here would be greatly appreciated.

link to pcn's and appeal response:

**TL;DR:**
Received 5 PCNs for the same restriction, all before the first notice arrived. Challenged all; first one rejected with a template response ignoring the timeline. Total cost is unaffordable. Trying to decide whether to pay the first at discount or pursue formal appeals for all based on proportionality.

The latter and I am happy to assist.
@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"
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Best if you get a moderator to combine this with your other thread, (see bottom right of the post)
Like Like x 1 View List


Thanks, I appreciate that.

I’ll pay the first PCN at the discounted rate.

For the remaining PCNs, would you be able to help me draft the formal representations based on the proportionality and/or financial hardship argument?

All contraventions occurred before I received the first PCN (27/02 contravention, received around 09/03), and I stopped using the road immediately after becoming aware.

Happy to provide any further details needed.