DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 117639--------------------------------------------------
Re: **PCN Lambeth - 53J - multiple PCNs before first notice
received / proportionality**
DIR By: ihateinjustice24
Date: May 3, 2026, 8:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
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:
HTML https://postimg.cc/gallery/CLLdcvc
**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.
#Post#: 117640--------------------------------------------------
Re: **PCN Lambeth - 53J - multiple PCNs before first notice
received / proportionality**
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: May 3, 2026, 8:21 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The latter and I am happy to assist.
#Post#: 117655--------------------------------------------------
Re: **PCN Lambeth - 53J - multiple PCNs before first notice
received / proportionality**
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: May 3, 2026, 12:19 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Best if you get a moderator to combine this with your other
thread, (see bottom right of the post)
#Post#: 117701--------------------------------------------------
Re: **PCN Lambeth - 53J - multiple PCNs before first notice
received / proportionality**
DIR By: ihateinjustice24
Date: May 4, 2026, 5:46 am
---------------------------------------------------------
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.
#Post#: 117879--------------------------------------------------
Re: **PCN Lambeth - 53J - multiple PCNs before first notice
received / proportionality**
DIR By: ihateinjustice24
Date: May 6, 2026, 4:35 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=24]Hippocrates[/member]
Just following up as I’m conscious of the 14-day deadline
approaching.
I’m planning to pay the first PCN at the discounted rate to
limit the risk.
For the remaining PCNs, I intend to make formal representations
on the basis that all contraventions occurred before I received
the first PCN (27/02 contravention, first notice received approx
09/03), so I had no opportunity to modify my behaviour. And
under evidence of financial hardship.
I may try contacting Lambeth for clarity as well, but I
understand they’ll likely just refer me back to the formal
process.
Would you be able to assist with drafting the formal
representations for the remaining PCNs on that basis?
Happy to provide anything further needed.
#Post#: 117913--------------------------------------------------
Re: **PCN Lambeth - 53J - multiple PCNs before first notice
received / proportionality**
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: May 6, 2026, 9:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Do not pay anything and simply state that a motorist is entitled
to know when and what to pay according to the statutory process
in all publications provided by the council.
#Post#: 119211--------------------------------------------------
Re: **PCN Lambeth - 53J - multiple PCNs before first notice
received / proportionality**
DIR By: ihateinjustice24
Date: May 19, 2026, 8:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=24]Hippocrates[/member] and all,
Just updating as the further 4 rejection responses have come
through.
The responses appear to be template replies focusing mainly on
signage, without really addressing anything i've said. They are
all identical in wording
My position from here is that I intend to continue contesting
the remaining PCNs on the basis that I had no opportunity to
modify my behaviour before becoming aware of the restriction
(first contravention 27/02, first notice received approx 09/03).
I also intend to rely on the point raised earlier regarding a
motorist being entitled to know when and what to pay according
to the statutory process and council publications, as the
sequence and timing here meant liability accumulated before I
was even aware there was an issue.
The financial aspect is not my primary argument, but I have
provided evidence showing the cumulative amount is beyond what I
can realistically afford, which I believe is relevant when
considering proportionality and discretion.
My concern is that if I continue through the formal process and
ultimately lose, the penalties increase substantially despite
already having demonstrated financial hardship. However, I also
feel I have little option but to continue, as the rejection
responses so far do not appear to engage with the actual
circumstances or points raised, and instead seem largely
standardised.
Does that seem like the correct overall approach from here,
particularly for formal representations and potentially tribunal
if necessary?
Appreciate all the help so far.
#Post#: 119892--------------------------------------------------
Re: **PCN Lambeth - 53J - multiple PCNs before first notice
received / proportionality**
DIR By: ihateinjustice24
Date: May 28, 2026, 6:38 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Just following up in case anyone has had a chance to look at
this further.
Any guidance before I move into the formal stage would be hugely
appreciated.
#Post#: 119910--------------------------------------------------
Re: **PCN Lambeth - 53J - multiple PCNs before first notice
received / proportionality**
DIR By: ihateinjustice24
Date: May 28, 2026, 8:19 am
---------------------------------------------------------
additionally, If this progresses to London Tribunals, is there
anyone here who undertakes representation or drafting assistance
for these types of cases? i'd be willing to pay.
#Post#: 119925--------------------------------------------------
Re: **PCN Lambeth - 53J - multiple PCNs before first notice
received / proportionality**
DIR By: ryan93
Date: May 28, 2026, 10:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hopefully someone will respond to your question.
If they have failed to consider your representation then that's
a legal point that can be challenged in accordance with
paragraph 1(7) under Schedule 1 of the relevant legislation. Now
if you cited all the PCNs in that single representation, then
that argument may apply to all the PCNs you cited.
If you submit a representation, make sure the PCN portal cites
the correct date for submission, once I submitted a
representation on Lambeth’s PCN portal, it cited the correct
date, then a few days later it changed the date, it seemed to
change the date when I sent a question to Lambeth Parking
services. I used this error as another legal point to challenge.
Also, calculate the last day for the PCN discount and take a
screenshot of portal on that date, then take a screenshot the
day after incase there are errors.
With regards to the LA exercising discretion, under Section 87
of the Traffic Management Act, they should give regard to the
guidance from the secretary of state, this official guidance
explicitly mandates that authorities must not fetter their
discretion. Gov.uk states on 28 May 2026: “They should approach
the exercise of discretion objectively and without regard to any
financial interest in the penalty or decisions that may have
been taken at an earlier stage in proceedings.”
However, I think the failure to consider argument and screenshot
errors on the PCN portal (if any occur) may be a valuable
strategy of appeal. I had a recent win against Lambeth, they did
not contest at tribunal, just on the basis of a PCN portal
screenshot error and telephone recordings where they misinformed
the appellant of the enforcement process. Though I am unsure if
they operate customer service by telephone or email in recent
times.
[member=12]Incandescent[/member], please correct me if I am
mistaken but for moving traffic pcns would a “repeated
contravention” be considered if service of the first PCN comes
after the other contraventions occurred or is it strictly
limited to parking pcns? In terms of a “continuous
contravention” could that apply if a driver passed through
multiple traffic restrictions in an area in a window of time on
the same date. As I recall seeing cases like that on the
previous forum (though it does not apply here).
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 3
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page