DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 80536--------------------------------------------------
Lambeth - 32j - 2 x PCN - Central Hill
DIR By: theeagleman
Date: July 10, 2025, 6:40 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hello,
A friend got 2 x PCN for the same contravention. No idea what
they were thinking, given how clear the signage is
PCNs and website payment demand below
PCN 1
HTML https://i.ibb.co/y3Psvph/PCN-1.jpg
HTML https://i.ibb.co/3H8DYH5/PCN-1-Screen-Edit.jpg
PCN 2
HTML https://i.ibb.co/PZQxqt0S/PCN-2.jpg
HTML https://i.ibb.co/QvMPvt3S/PCN-2-Screen-Edit.jpg
Appeal for PCN 1 (very weak)
PCN Validity – Collateral challenge
The demands on the PCN website made are deemed excessive on
screen website (see above)...
I do note that a few by Hippocrates has been won upon NoR and
then at tribunal showing excessive
Appeal for PCN 2
That the penalty charge exceeded the amount applicable in the
circumstances of the case.
Continuing Contravention
The above PCN were sent sequentially, however I was not aware of
the initial PCN XXXXXX. Thus it would be deemed disproportionate
to punish multiple times, as the driver was not aware.
I would like to draw your attention to the following case:
2160273606
The appellant does not deny the contravention but states that he
was travelling to Highgate hospital and was a stranger to the
area and made the same mistake twice in one day as a consequence
of which he received two PCN's
I am satisfied form the evidence that the contravention did
occur. However I also find that as the there is a time lag in
issuing a PCN by post, a motorist can unwittingly continue to
make the same mistake until they receive notification of the PCN
and in these circumstances I find the second PCN issued to be a
continuing contravention and allow the appeal in relation to the
second PCN under case number 2160273606 but refuse the first PCN
issued under case number 2160273661
In light of the aforementioned, I was not aware of any
subsequent PCN thus ask for this PCN to cancelled.
#Post#: 80537--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth - 32j - 2 x PCN - Central Hill
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: July 10, 2025, 6:46 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Instructions are to not redact PCN Number and vehicle
registration on PCNs, as it means we can't go and look at the
photos and in this case, the video, the sole evidence.
Also, please post a GSV link to the location, because Central
Hill is a long street. In fact by not specifying the street the
driver turned into, you could claim 'vague locus'. A postal PCN
is sent to the registered keeper who may not have been driving
at the time. This has won appeals in the past at London
Tribunals.
#Post#: 80543--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth - 32j - 2 x PCN - Central Hill
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: July 11, 2025, 2:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
OP, the vehicle is used commercially which invites the
questions:
who is the registered keeper?
if your friend, is the PCN addressed to them personally or in a
business capacity?
#Post#: 80589--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth - 32j - 2 x PCN - Central Hill
DIR By: theeagleman
Date: July 11, 2025, 8:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Incandescent link ---
>
> Instructions are to not redact PCN Number and vehicle
registration on PCNs, as it means we can't go and look at the
photos and in this case, the video, the sole evidence.
>
> Also, please post a GSV link to the location, because Central
Hill is a long street. In fact by not specifying the street the
driver turned into, you could claim 'vague locus'. A postal PCN
is sent to the registered keeper who may not have been driving
at the time. This has won appeals in the past at London
Tribunals.
>
--- End Quote ---
Sorry, I am still in the old way of thought with the previous
forum.
PCN 1
HTML https://i.ibb.co/TBx0ZVVg/PXL-20250710-223005868.jpg
PCN 2
HTML https://i.ibb.co/kgkHF6DN/PXL-20250710-223036020.jpg
GSV Location -
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/6HyQs3DLZZePeYw56
Turned left on Gipsy Hill
--- Quote from: H C Andersen link ---
>
> OP, the vehicle is used commercially which invites the
questions:
>
> who is the registered keeper?
> if your friend, is the PCN addressed to them personally or in
a business capacity?
>
>
--- End Quote ---
Registered keeper is in my friends name and address, and PCN was
personally addressed.
Nothing in a business capacity in relation to the RK (it is used
for that though)
#Post#: 80631--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth - 32j - 2 x PCN - Central Hill
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: July 11, 2025, 12:31 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
This advance sign is against you : -
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/SP2Bgc47tPahQotr8
The traffic lights have a straight ahead arrow beside the green
phase light which has a green straight ahead arrow as well:-
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/cHMpruunck7VTrtr6
So your case is not strong, in my opinion.
#Post#: 80637--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth - 32j - 2 x PCN - Central Hill
DIR By: theeagleman
Date: July 11, 2025, 3:17 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Incandescent link ---
>
> This advance sign is against you : -
>
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/SP2Bgc47tPahQotr8
> The traffic lights have a straight ahead arrow beside the
green phase light which has a green straight ahead arrow as
well:-
>
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/cHMpruunck7VTrtr6
> So your case is not strong, in my opinion.
>
--- End Quote ---
Thank you for your opinion.
I agree.
However, does the second PCN have a case for "continuing
contravention"? in your view
#Post#: 80642--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth - 32j - 2 x PCN - Central Hill
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: July 11, 2025, 3:58 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The issue on which to win is the website.
#Post#: 80648--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth - 32j - 2 x PCN - Central Hill
DIR By: theeagleman
Date: July 11, 2025, 4:35 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Hippocrates link ---
>
> The issue on which to win is the website.
>
--- End Quote ---
Is this based on after the initial reps, on their site giving a
demand?
or is the current demand a potential technicality?
For PCN 1. Discount option runs out on Sunday, so any draft you
can point me to to file, would be grateful.
Vague locus another?
#Post#: 84230--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth - 32j - 2 x PCN - Central Hill
DIR By: theeagleman
Date: August 5, 2025, 8:46 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Lambeth have as expected rejected both appeals - same rejection
on both appeals.
on NoR it states 14 days it will go 160, and 28 days it will be
240.
Site states this Friday it will be 240 (The demands on their
site as per below)
HTML https://i.ibb.co/RpFQ19Xg/JC-Central.jpg
#Post#: 84316--------------------------------------------------
Re: Lambeth - 32j - 2 x PCN - Central Hill
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: August 5, 2025, 3:42 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Please show the NORs.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 3
DIR Next Page