DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 130098--------------------------------------------------
Two PCNs, same camera, 7 minutes apart — Wormholt scheme, Sawley
Rd (H&F) — both rejected — advice please
DIR By: mmuk
Date: September 10, 2026, 9:55 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi all, hoping for guidance on two linked PCNs before deciding
whether to appeal to London Tribunals.
Facts:
London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham, Wormholt Neighbourhood
Improvement Trial (Code 52M, No Motor Vehicle except
taxis/permit holders)
Camera VA165, Sawley Road near Bloemfontein Road junction
PCN 1 — 24/05/2026, 10:59, vehicle entering westbound
PCN 2 — 24/05/2026, 11:06, vehicle exiting eastbound
7 minutes apart, same camera, same vehicle — genuine parcel
delivery to a resident on Sawley Road itself
Both representations rejected
Main ground: the restriction signs at the junction appear to
face inbound traffic only — for both the westbound entry and
eastbound exit, I don't believe either direction passes a sign
facing them. Council's rejection didn't engage with this —
instead answered "nearside vs offside" placement, and separately
answered a private hire vehicle exemption point never raised.
On the double PCN: council's rejection claims the two PCNs are
for contraventions in "different locations" — but both PCNs list
the same location (Sawley Rd nr Jct Bloemfontein Rd) and same
camera VA165. That statement looks factually wrong on their own
paperwork.
Council also ignored a formal request (Reg 4(2)) for the signage
plan/TRO showing sign orientation, in both rejections.
Question: has anyone dealt with this exact location/camera
before, or has a similar sign-orientation or duplicate-PCN case
gone to adjudication? Any view on whether the signage argument
and the "different locations" error are strong enough to run at
London Tribunals, or am I missing something the council would
win on? Trying to get this right before the appeal deadlines.
Grateful for any steer.
#Post#: 130108--------------------------------------------------
Re: Two PCNs, same camera, 7 minutes apart — Wormholt scheme,
Sawley Rd (H&F) — both rejected — advice please
DIR By: John U.K.
Date: September 10, 2026, 11:54 am
---------------------------------------------------------
For meaningful advice, please to have a read of
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/read-this-first-before-posting-your-case!-this-section-is-for-council-tfl-dartme/
and post up here
all sides of 1st PCN and first side of 2nd PCN (only redact yr
name & address from this and other documents posted here - leave
all else in),
copies (not transcripts) of all correspondence to and from the
Council,
any council photos,
and a GSV link to the location.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1