DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 67900--------------------------------------------------
Southwark PCN 52m Failing to comply with a prohibition, Rye Ln
& Copeland Rd
DIR By: Sameh
Date: April 21, 2025, 8:05 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I received this PCN, for entering a restricted zone between Rye
Ln & Copeland Rd in London Borough of Southwark. Obviously I
didn't know this was a restricted zone until I received this
PCN. The restricted zone begins right after a left turn off of
Rye Lane with no prior warning on the approach road. I revisited
the area on Google map today to take photos (attached) and as
you can see, there is no clear warning on the approach road, the
signs are small and high up and just after you turn left making
it dangerous to back out of the turn once committed and the road
markings (on the road surface) are wiped off the road surface
compared to the return way. The provided Google map, which
likely was taken older than my PCN evidence photo (attached)
showed faint road markings. Since then it is likely the paint
has deteriorated to a degree that was not visible or noticeable
by my eyes.
Any advice you can provide or the likely hood of me having
grounds for a successful appeal would be much
appreciated.[attachimg=1][attachimg=2]
[member=1]cp8759[/member]
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 67907--------------------------------------------------
Re: Southwark PCN 52m Failing to comply with a prohibition, Rye
Ln & Copeland Rd
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: April 21, 2025, 8:52 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The location stated on the PCN is wrong, draft reps:
[indent]
Dear London Borough of Southwark,
The alleged contravention did not occur. Your CCTV footage show
my vehicle never reached the junction of Rye Lane and Copeland
Road, my vehicle was at the junction of Rye Lane with Sternhall
Lane. The junction with Copeland Road isn't shown on the CCTV
and owing to its position, it would be impossible for the CCTV
camera to even see the junction between Rye Lane and Copeland
Road.
In light of the above the penalty charge must be cancelled.
Yours faithfully,
[/indent]
The council will reject this, but it's obviously a viable
argument for the tribunal.
#Post#: 67946--------------------------------------------------
Re: Southwark PCN 52m Failing to comply with a prohibition, Rye
Ln & Copeland Rd
DIR By: Sameh
Date: April 21, 2025, 12:28 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for your kind and prompt reply. The exact location on
the PCN (JK14994838) is "RYE LANE JUNCTION COPELAND ROAD" as in
the attached picture. Would that make any difference in the way
that I should draft the appeal representation? Do you think the
poor road markings arguments would still add more weight to
appeal?
Thanks and regards,
Sameh[attachimg=1]
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 68050--------------------------------------------------
Re: Southwark PCN 52m Failing to comply with a prohibition, Rye
Ln & Copeland Rd
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: April 22, 2025, 7:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The PCN is invalid. They cannot increase the price 28 days from
the date of the notice. Happy to do this one at Tribunal. One
already won and another not contested.
I make this collateral challenge re the validity of the PCN. The
period in which you may serve a charge certificate is wrongly
expressed as it is truncated. Please see Schedule I of the 2003
Act which clearly states from the date of service as provided at
para. 5(2)
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/2003/3/schedule/1/enacted
In light of the above, please cancel.
FYI only.
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/southwark-failing-to-comply-with-a-prohibition-of-certain-types-of-vehicle/msg66338/#msg66338
What does the current website say re payment?
#Post#: 73281--------------------------------------------------
Re: Southwark PCN 52m Failing to comply with a prohibition, Rye
Ln & Copeland Rd
DIR By: Sameh
Date: May 26, 2025, 6:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=1]cp8759[/member]
Hi all,
This is the rejection of representation I received today. What's
your view?
Regards
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 73283--------------------------------------------------
Re: Southwark PCN 52m Failing to comply with a prohibition, Rye
Ln & Copeland Rd
DIR By: Pastmybest
Date: May 26, 2025, 6:52 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The rejection also mis states the time at which the may increase
the payment this and the errors highlighted by Hippo are winners
#Post#: 73301--------------------------------------------------
Re: Southwark PCN 52m Failing to comply with a prohibition, Rye
Ln & Copeland Rd
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: May 26, 2025, 10:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Take your pick who represents you.
#Post#: 73334--------------------------------------------------
Re: Southwark PCN 52m Failing to comply with a prohibition, Rye
Ln & Copeland Rd
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: May 26, 2025, 4:31 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=5183]Sameh[/member] the rejection is nonsense, and you
can take your pick as to who represents you. The latest notable
decision for this location is L & F Plant Hire Ltd v London
Borough of Southwark (2250022582, 5 May 2025)
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/180ijXfTeLbow__3tjOHIZ5E1tZ8zk8rX/view,<br
/>and that is based entirely on Nicola Samson v London Borough
of
Southwark (2230132125, 20 March 2023)
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JjuL2bwjXg5zpATKmubH2n0eqiPeuCJk/view.
#Post#: 73347--------------------------------------------------
Re: Southwark PCN 52m Failing to comply with a prohibition, Rye
Ln & Copeland Rd
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: May 27, 2025, 1:45 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=5183]Sameh[/member] [member=1]cp8759[/member] I would
ask cp8759 to do this case for you.
#Post#: 73386--------------------------------------------------
Re: Southwark PCN 52m Failing to comply with a prohibition, Rye
Ln & Copeland Rd
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: May 27, 2025, 7:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Pastmybest link ---
>
> The rejection also mis states the time at which the may
increase the payment this and the errors highlighted by Hippo
are winners
>
--- End Quote ---
It now seems that adjudicators are changing their minds on the
website issues and stating it is for the High Court.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1