DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 83652--------------------------------------------------
Re: SOUHWARK : charged twice for 53c grove lane junction de
crespigny park/windsor walk
DIR By: moonstomper5
Date: July 31, 2025, 10:47 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
On 1st July I drove along Denmark Hill** turned left into
*depesigny Park then left onto grove lane******. I was looking
for somewhere to park before realising it was all permits only
and so turned around and drove straight back up Grove lane and
onto Dog Kennel Hill then home. I did not stop.
On ** 16th July I received notification from EuropCar Hire (the
car was on hire) that they had received and subsequently paid at
the discount level two PCNs for the following contravention
Failing to comply with a restriction on vehicles entering a
pedestrian and cycle zone 53c ***** Grove Lane junction
Windsor Walk 14.54 1 July
"" Grove Lane junction De Crespigny Park
14.56 1 July
The prohibition is in Grove Lane and extends from its junction
with Windsor Walk to De Crespigny Road. These contraventions
were caught on separate cameras situated at the 2 junctions
which are some 135m apart.
Europcar letter included an invoice(s) for £250 representing 2x
fines @ £80 each + 2 x administration fees @ £45 each .
The letter informs me they have already paid the fines and will
automatically take the money from the same card I used to hire
the vehicle in 14days (30th July)
...........................................................
..............................................................
........................................................................
I'm sorry I really don't know if this is what you meant but here
it is anyway. Ive just filled in the blanks from your message
query. Apologies if that's not what you meant . I don't do
online/typing well and this is my first active forum query in
years and years.
#Post#: 83653--------------------------------------------------
Re: SOUHWARK : charged twice for 53c grove lane junction de
crespigny park/windsor walk
DIR By: moonstomper5
Date: July 31, 2025, 11:20 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I really am so upset by this. I've walked and cycled 100+ times
down that road and have NEVER noticed the signs. I no longer own
a car and had no idea these restrictions were even a thing. I
cycle EVERYWHERE so I am usually more than aware keeping up to
date with local road changes including highway code updates
etc.
This was the first time I had driven since my son died in
November so was taking extra care as I got used to the
vehicle.The only reason I can think of for not responding to the
signs is maybe I was TOO focused on driving and so less on the
areaq as I thought I know these roads well.
~I am clearly in the wrong - it is me driving . But I can't
believe they got me twice for same thing 2 mins apart.
Southwark council are thieves.
#Post#: 83681--------------------------------------------------
Re: SOUHWARK : charged twice for 53c grove lane junction de
crespigny park/windsor walk
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: August 1, 2025, 5:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Let's just deal with the facts pl.
The prohibited area is Grove Lane between its junctions with
Windsor and DeCrespigny.
The PCNs show your car entering the area twice, not entering and
leaving but entering. At 14.54 you drove north from Windsor and
then at 14.57 drove south from DeCespigny. If we're to compile
an argument, then accuracy is essential. Windsor is a cul-de-sac
and therefore you could not have turned into Grove from there.
Pl think again about the events because you couldn't have turned
left from DeCespigny and then returned south because this was
your second entry.
(BTW, I'm a pensioner as well and appreciate the issues)
#Post#: 83684--------------------------------------------------
Re: SOUHWARK : charged twice for 53c grove lane junction de
crespigny park/windsor walk
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: August 1, 2025, 5:38 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The main focus should be a joint complaint to Southwark and the
hire company at present.
#Post#: 83705--------------------------------------------------
Re: SOUHWARK : charged twice for 53c grove lane junction de
crespigny park/windsor walk
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: August 1, 2025, 9:07 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Have you seen the videos?
#Post#: 83752--------------------------------------------------
Re: SOUHWARK : charged twice for 53c grove lane junction de
crespigny park/windsor walk
DIR By: moonstomper5
Date: August 1, 2025, 4:26 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I am sorry. i used my google timeline as the basis for that
info. i don't know how or where that restriction is in realo
life and to be honest in the videos all i see is a car drivinhg
then a car driving again.
Please don't be cross about my lack of understanding. i am an
infrequent driver and did not know about these restricted bits.
That's all.
Thank you for trying to help me though. I have a plan and am
getting email help from Hipprocrates from this point and gosh I
do need it eh???
Sorry if I sound defeated. I am not, only deflated.
Again, thank you for your time HC
#Post#: 83765--------------------------------------------------
Re: SOUHWARK : charged twice for 53c grove lane junction de
crespigny park/windsor walk
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: August 2, 2025, 3:31 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I am going to complain to the council and the hirer.
#Post#: 83804--------------------------------------------------
Re: SOUHWARK : charged twice for 53c grove lane junction de
crespigny park/windsor walk
DIR By: ManxTom
Date: August 2, 2025, 10:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: John U.K. link ---
>
> What is the relevant clause in your hire agreement about
paying PCNs, etc.?
>
--- End Quote ---
I don't think the OP has answered this question?
There was an argument on this website that if hire companies
have a term in the hire contract allowing them to pay PCNs
without referral to the hirer, then such a term would be an
unfair term under s63 of the
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/63
insofar
as such a term prevents the hirer from exercising their legal
right to challenge the PCN, and therefore the term is legally
unenforceable by the hire company against the hirer.
So in theory the hirer would be able to recover any recharge
from the hire company.
Whether this argument has been properly tested, I don't know...
#Post#: 121762--------------------------------------------------
Re: SOUHWARK : charged twice for 53c grove lane junction de
crespigny park/windsor walk
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: June 14, 2026, 3:35 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Sorry as I am bit late sorting this out. I am going to complain
in no uncertain terms as the council should not have accepted
the monies anyway.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 2
DIR Previous Page