Author Topic: **PCN Lambeth - 53J - multiple PCNs before first notice received / proportionality**  (Read 12 times)

0 Members and 15 Guests are viewing this topic.


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.

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


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"