Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: pred02 on August 12, 2026, 11:32:54 am
-
How do I open your NOR attachments without downloading?
Hi,
Please try here
https://share.icloud.com/photos/07cYqc4v5sskm0wQYGnxdUXRQ
https://share.icloud.com/photos/02fe06gVdgxMk7LelsOymUZqA
https://share.icloud.com/photos/09cxtv_KAvvCWZfUlWhoZL4qw
Thank you
-
How do I open your NOR attachments without downloading?
-
Unless sent by email, deemed date of service of NOR is 15th September so keep an eye on the discount as on the website.
I received the two rejections by e-mail last week with the links above. The centre of their argument is that there is adequate notification from Stockwell Garden. I do not recall the sign for anything beyond the school hour restrictions. As this is a new LTN and Google Maps images are a year old they may not show up. The video I took before starts at a turn to Lingham Street not further down from Stockwell Gardens.
I will get this information but would be good to understand if my case is strong for appeal - as there are two identical PCN its quite double jeopardy 320 pounds.
Thank you
-
Unless sent by email, deemed date of service of NOR is 15th September so keep an eye on the discount as on the website.
-
Pl stop transcribing, your wrists must be shot with all that typing.
Post the docs themselves. If uncertain how, read the top of the Forum main page: READ THIS FIRST...
You have made formal reps, so the next stage is to appeal or pay.
I can't work out what they've said in their response because the format makes this very difficult, hence the need to post actual docs with whose format we're familiar.
I am sorry about that. I've included the document. Please let me know if I should change anything with the formal appeal.
https://www.icloud.com/iclouddrive/022JLGUrOcWL189EGUBjdO28A#Our_Response_to_you
https://www.icloud.com/iclouddrive/046jERRnKZFmvDSW-H8C9akHQ#Our_Response_to_you_(1)
Thank you.
-
Pl stop transcribing, your wrists must be shot with all that typing.
Post the docs themselves. If uncertain how, read the top of the Forum main page: READ THIS FIRST...
You have made formal reps, so the next stage is to appeal or pay.
I can't work out what they've said in their response because the format makes this very difficult, hence the need to post actual docs with whose format we're familiar.
-
Thanks, I've now had both my initial appeals rejected with the below details. Do I have a strong case to make an appeal and risk double jeopardy against two PCN for the same violation as above?
https://www.icloud.com/iclouddrive/022JLGUrOcWL189EGUBjdO28A#Our_Response_to_you
https://www.icloud.com/iclouddrive/046jERRnKZFmvDSW-H8C9akHQ#Our_Response_to_you_(1)
Is there anything that I should change with my formal appeal letter?
Thanks!
-
Thanks - I’ve incorporated the feedback into the below note, would appreciate any feedback before submitting today.
PCN references: LJ38789898 and LJ38738803139
Ground of representation: The alleged contravention did not occur
I was driving north-west along Lingham Street towards Clapham Road, having turned right into Lingham Street from Stockwell Green.
At the entrance to Lingham Street, the prescribed Pedestrian and Cycle Zone signs state that the restriction operates Monday–Friday, 08:15–09:15 and 14:45–15:45. I entered outside those restricted hours. The signage therefore objectively indicated to me that the prohibition was not then in force and that I could lawfully proceed along Lingham Street.
However, after I had already committed to Lingham Street and travelled approximately 100 metres along it, I encountered a new and materially different restriction: a 24-hour Motor Vehicles Prohibited restriction.
There was no advance warning at the entrance to Lingham Street that, despite the part-time restriction displayed there, motorists would encounter a separate 24/7 prohibition further along the same road. Nor was there an alternative road or exit available before reaching the second restriction. By the time those signs became apparent, the only apparent means of avoiding passing them would have been to stop in the carriageway and perform a U-turn.
I submit that this arrangement does not adequately convey the restriction to a motorist. A driver is expressly presented with a part-time prohibition on entering Lingham Street and, having lawfully entered outside its hours of operation, is subsequently confronted without adequate advance warning by a continuous 24/7 prohibition on the same road.
The Council’s camera subsequently records my vehicle exiting the restricted section. However, the issue is not simply whether my vehicle passed the later signs, but whether the restriction was adequately and clearly conveyed to a motorist before the motorist had committed to the route.
In these circumstances, I submit that the signage was insufficient to adequately convey the restriction and therefore that the alleged contravention did not occur.
I have received two PCNs — LJ38789898 and LJ38738803139 — for the same alleged contravention at this location on separate occasions. Both journeys occurred in materially identical circumstances and arose from precisely the same signage arrangement.
I therefore ask the Council to consider these representations in respect of both PCNs. If the Council accepts that the restriction was not adequately conveyed in respect of one journey, the same issue necessarily applies to the other.
For these reasons, I respectfully request that both PCNs, LJ38789898 and LJ38738803139, be cancelled.
-
IMO yes.
You start at the turn into Lingham which objectively reveals a part-time Pedestrian and Cycle zone. You entered when the prohibition was not in effect.
The next sign is your video which shows on the same road a new and 24/7 prohibition i.e. Motor Vehicles prohibited.
You passed these signs and were caught by the council's camera exiting.
IMO, the signage does not meet the legal test i.e. to introduce without warning on the same length of street such an onerous prohibition which leaves motorists no alternative than to stop in the road(there aren't any alternative)and perform U-turns.
Contravention did not occur would be my grounds.
-
Pl answer the question: does the video you took show the entrance to the 24/7 area and the council's video the exit?
Yes the video I took does show the enterance to the 24/7 area. Here is the picture. There is no whjere to turn through as mentioned before.
https://share.icloud.com/photos/0c0yiLB-Pds-esEWdRCfXqZgg
Do I have a case?
Thanks
-
Pl answer the question: does the video you took show the entrance to the 24/7 area and the council's video the exit?
-
There is no informal challenge and they usually reoffer the discount.
-
Hi,
I’ve now received another PCN for the same alleged contravention, so there is quite a lot at stake if I challenge both.
It would be helpful to understand whether it’s worth making an informal challenge at this stage. In particular:
If I make an informal challenge, do I retain the option to pay the reduced penalty if the challenge is rejected?
Should I reference both PCNs in each challenge, given that they relate to the same location and circumstances?
Is there any argument that two PCNs for the same contravention within a relatively short period should be treated as a continuous contravention, rather than two separate penalties?
Thanks for any advice.
https://share.icloud.com/photos/0beebAt0v09bE3dN6Sgcj7FSg
https://share.icloud.com/photos/089U_PKVQ2nCbcau9X05qDNOg
https://share.icloud.com/photos/0c3LNWl70v5tLrIRfvAOeO2YA
https://share.icloud.com/photos/0e8OlH72yXJnqZlu1WwvqckhA
-
Currently they are issuing premature charge certificates once a Notice of Rejection has been issued. A future bridge I accept.
-
The OP's video shows the start of the 24/7 restriction, both ends look similar but there are distinguishing features that separate the council's video of them exiting from the OP's video of where it starts. OP, if I'm wrong then pl say.
If I am correct then perhaps....
I was driving along Lingham Street in a north-westerly direction towards Clapham Road at approx. 2.33 having turned right into Lingham Street from Stockwell Grn.
After approx. 100m I was, without warning, confronted by a 24/7 MOTOR VEHICLES PROHIBITED sign. There wasn't an exit from the road at that point and therefore I had no choice but to continue. The council's camera shows me exiting this zone at 2.34.
The background to these events is that the council has placed prescribed Pedestrian and Cycle zone signs at the junction of Lingham Street and Stockwell Grn which have effect Mon-Fri. 8.15 - 9.15; 2.45-3.45 therefore, having passed these at 2.32 I was travelling along an unrestricted length of road as regards moving traffic prohibitions. There are not any signs of the prescribed form terminating this zone. Despite this and for some reason best known to itself, the council has placed 24/7 MOTOR VEHICLES PROHIBITED signs within this part-time area.
This is conflicting, confusing and, I assert, unlawful. It therefore follows that any contravention purportedly arising from the presence of these signs is invalid.
The PCN must be cancelled.
The council should also address the presence of these signs and make up its mind whether it wants a full or part-time prohibition and of what type i.e. Pedestrian and Cycle or MOTOR VEHICLES prohibited.
-
Surely the bottom line is that the signs in GSV at both ends of this restriction show 2.45pm as the start of the restriction, but the OP h as a PCN with a photo showing the car exiting at the other end of the street and in contravention at 14.34.
We need to see those signs !
-
Let's be clear, the PCN snapshot shows a vehicle exiting a 24/7 motor vehicles prohibited restricted area. As such it proves nothing.
However, your video presumably shows the entrance to this area.
So, on the face of it you passed those entrance signs.
But where we you supposed to go? Are there warning signs directing motor vehicles off Lingham before one gets to the restricted area?
-
Here is the video of intersection:
https://share.icloud.com/photos/0eboCOaZ_ElHe60nLExFtwbOQ
-
Restriction is now here: https://maps.app.goo.gl/nBup2RgzbV35NsyRA
Video is front on and doesn't show the signs passed - might be an avenue for appeal, others more experienced may advise.
-
Here are the other two pages of the PCN:
https://share.icloud.com/photos/05d6BW5ulX_KiqJW_29Ou2H9Q
https://share.icloud.com/photos/00bn14HtuRQ5aZgQLa9gSM9fA
It’s PCN: LJ38789898
Registration: AU67VUB
Thanks
-
Looks like there is a relatively new LTN through traffic prohibition in the middle of Lingham street that you have fallen foul of, nothing to do with the timed school access. If you go on their map, and select the speed and movement layer you can find and download the traffic order.
Can't read the VRM or PCN number - if you supply these there might be technical appeals.
-
We need to see all pages of the PCN, with only name and address redacted, to check it for errors and also to see the video. This requires PCN Number and car registration.
GSV for April 2025 shows afternoon times starting at 2.45pm.They may have changed since, so if you can supply up-to-date photos it will save a lot of time conjecturing. GSV shows the restriction ends further down Lingham St, and the signs there show the same time
-
Hi,
I’d appreciate some advice on whether I have grounds to appeal this PCN.
I turned right from Stockwell Gardens into Lingham Street. At the junction there is a sign stating that motor vehicles are prohibited during School Street hours: 08:15–09:15 and 14:45–15:45, Monday to Friday.
Further down Lingham Street, before the camera/traffic filter, I saw another sign referring to the School Street hours. As it was approximately 14:34 when I passed through, I understood that the restriction was not in operation and continued through.
I’ve now received a 52m PCN for “failing to comply with a prohibition on certain types of vehicle (motor vehicles)”. I am likely to receive another PCN as I drove the same way later that day under the similar assumptions.
I’ve attached the PCN and a Google Maps image showing the signage at the entrance. Unfortunately, the second sign isn’t visible on the current Google Maps imagery.
Am I misunderstanding the restrictions here? Is there a separate 24-hour restriction at the traffic filter, and if so, do I have any grounds to appeal given the timed signage on the approach?
Thanks!
https://share.icloud.com/photos/032IZkxyUNTIbp2enIsa_iKIQ
https://share.icloud.com/photos/085ZpgSNcbqJWT8Q-lau91fiw