DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 106823--------------------------------------------------
PCN - Moving Traffic Violation - Salter's Hill, Lambeth
DIR By: jrob
Date: January 21, 2026, 8:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I received a Moving Traffic Violation PCN for failing to give
way on Salter's Hill, Lambeth.
I don't recall the incident, but looking at the video, I think
this is wrong/very harsh. The oncoming car had barely made it
onto the road by the time I was a few metres (5?) from the Give
Way sign, and the car I don't think even had to slow down by the
time I had got past the sign on the other side - it certainly
didn't have to stop. There was also a car in front of me that
would have partially obstructed my view from the oncoming car.
Would appreciate views and advice on dealing with this.
Google Streetview location
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/DYByifg7mDkEuqKFA
Details:
Contravention Code: 37 J - Failing to give way to oncoming
vehicles (Camera enforcement)
Date of contravention: 11/01/2026 14:18
Location: Salter's Hill
Date of PCN: 20/01/2026
PCN Letter Pages:
One
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kKm9bwHs0w9YEDWDbMGUeniae_mgmC0l/view?usp=drive_link
Two
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/19ahN-hY-A_d8tyJNJYC0trcjjJE98ZSq/view?usp=drive_link
Three
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wRXmZydavyDmJrzQgXu8eB0CY2f9tYtR/view?usp=drive_link<br
/>
Four
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LGG31k9-I8VaEI1pv2TWoCa2YELO4UwR/view?usp=drive_link
Images & Video from Portal:
Image 1
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1acILimtcvkfUCbPHOjOpgq2Q61VwDufx/view?usp=drive_link
Image 2
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zS7THIhkBKuOu-LJT8IsTB3J8YRJpGzl/view?usp=drive_link
Image 3
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dAgjZ4pobkNtfAFJDuKu2QWqtaKSETnL/view?usp=drive_link
Image 4
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lRDVWV5MxNGc-UILPD2_ulbP7MOebKBh/view?usp=drive_link
Image 5
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/19-fQmQ_syBSMlIeO58ot92MNtvYyFI1J/view?usp=drive_link
Video 1
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QZTOGd8XK19QU3Gye2IZiMZrUVZoyP0y/view?usp=drive_link
#Post#: 106868--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN - Moving Traffic Violation - Salter's Hill, Lambeth
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: January 21, 2026, 3:25 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The video won't win you this in my view - some adjudicator do
rule in appellants' favour in marginal cases at this location
but the oncoming car was too close to the priority area in my
view.
Our member Hippo may have something on other matters.
#Post#: 106881--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN - Moving Traffic Violation - Salter's Hill, Lambeth
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: January 21, 2026, 4:40 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I don't agree, sorry. The oncoming car is shown as just bumping
over the speed hump when the OP's car is leaving the narrow part
of the carriageway.
Here is the view as one exits the narrow section.
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/82Gy6j6S147pkEEX8
The back of the priority sign is seen and also the speed hump.
The hump is 17.5 metres away from the priority sign, and it's a
20 mph zone, so the video shows the OP's car was in course of
exiting the priority area whilst the oncoming cars just bumping
over the speed hump.
#Post#: 106884--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN - Moving Traffic Violation - Salter's Hill, Lambeth
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: January 21, 2026, 4:46 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Yes looking at it again it is in the OP's favour so worth a go
on the contravention alone.
#Post#: 106890--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN - Moving Traffic Violation - Salter's Hill, Lambeth
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: January 21, 2026, 5:20 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Website page is still in disarray. Please screenshot the
payments page as if to make a representation.
#Post#: 106939--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN - Moving Traffic Violation - Salter's Hill, Lambeth
DIR By: jrob
Date: January 22, 2026, 6:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for your help. Not sure if this is what you meant the
payments page because its just 2 fields. (Payments page
screensho
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1z-vRbu6bhnYjosjT6RxpIMQHONQYzzo1/view?usp=drive_linkt).
There's a representation button though - here's that screenshot
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1E4RnesPHrnBsYWOkttyywG2A2mJb4wJC/view?usp=drive_link.
Or maybe you meant the main dashboard page
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1a-zJ6RSDDnOfIT563qb_918mLRLsoDYl/view?usp=drive_link?
#Post#: 107128--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN - Moving Traffic Violation - Salter's Hill, Lambeth
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: January 23, 2026, 11:19 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Two cases from yesterday - one allowed, one not. You decide.
HTML https://i.ibb.co/bjXKRfw9/7a9eaac1-3336-4697-bc81-78795f5a818a-ezgif-com-video-to-gif-converter.gif
HTML https://i.ibb.co/5WfhXcZ3/130c1707-2d02-46d0-90b1-99325faf363c-ezgif-com-video-to-gif-converter.gif
#Post#: 107132--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN - Moving Traffic Violation - Salter's Hill, Lambeth
DIR By: mickR
Date: January 23, 2026, 11:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
top one i say is allowed bottom one disallowed (the approaching
vehicle had to stop)
#Post#: 107272--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN - Moving Traffic Violation - Salter's Hill, Lambeth
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: January 24, 2026, 4:59 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: stamfordman link ---
>
> Two cases from yesterday - one allowed, one not. You decide.
>
> [img width=383.9930419921875
height=287.9976806640625]
HTML https://i.ibb.co/bjXKRfw9/7a9eaac1-3336-4697-bc81-78795f5a818a-ezgif-com-video-to-gif-converter.gif[/img]
> [img width=383.9930419921875
height=287.9976806640625]
HTML https://i.ibb.co/5WfhXcZ3/130c1707-2d02-46d0-90b1-99325faf363c-ezgif-com-video-to-gif-converter.gif[/img]
>
--- End Quote ---
Is one of them this case, because Mr Greenslade's logic is what
we have been banging on about for years: -
--- Quote ---
> The Appellant’s case is that the vehicle in the opposite
direction was not yet at the priority point when they began to
move forward.
>
> Although the Appellant’s vehicle is seen to pass the sign
indicating the requirement, it is by no means clear from the
images that the oncoming vehicle had, at that moment, passed the
equivalent point on the other side of the bridge.
>
> The Adjudicator is only able decide an appeal by making
findings of fact on the basis of the evidence produced by the
parties and applying relevant law.
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 107415--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN - Moving Traffic Violation - Salter's Hill, Lambeth
DIR By: jrob
Date: January 26, 2026, 9:46 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hey, not sure where this leaves us/what to do now... any advice?
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page