Jump to content

Traffic fines around Dulwich village - has anyone appealed successfully


Recommended Posts

boomshake22 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> i appealled to the fine entering

> dulwich village and was successful


Your letter's headed "Representation". Did Southwark reverse the decision themselves after considering it?

Yes. The appeal is a representation, I basically appealed with this letter and they considered it and cancelled the fine.

I used information from another forum,as advice.


This charge us unfair and should be challenged.

You were very lucky boomshake.


This charge is very unfair as Dulwich Village has been a normal thoroughfare for cars etc. for many years with no problem.


Southwark Council should be ashamed of themselves for putting these measures in place. This started with the stupid planters put in place across another normal thoroughfare in use for over a hundred years.


Please use your vote wisely on the 6th May.

Thanks for posting this. Did they give the reason that they cancelled the fine?


Your reference to conflicting info about PCN saying representation must be by post, but website lets you do it online was the case with my Lewisham PCN too but I didn't know this might possibly enable me to get the fine cancelled.

I've paid now but maybe i can quote this bit and ask for a refund?




boomshake22 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> i appealled to the fine entering dulwich village

> and was successful , i have attached my letter

> please edit as required

> you can simply submit this online on the southwark

> parking website, that what i did, add your own

> pics

>

> good luck with this,,, it is an absolute disgrace

> of a cashcow charge

Thanks, it's worth doing the research, please feel free to pass the letter on, yes the pcn says to reply in writing on the pcn but the website states you can submit online, much easier, again misleading info on the pcn.


Whatever convinced them to cancel my pcn,is detailed in the letter, so it's an error on their part that they are obviously not admitting, and as far as I can tell not correcting.

Can anyone please advise me if I?m allowed to push my vehicle to my home in Dulwich village from the roundabout to save me having to drive for 30 minutes to get to my home instead of the 30 second journey from the roundabout

Brill letter Boomshake. Thank you so much for sharing. We received a PCN 2 weeks after yours and appealed right away. Similar points but not nearly as well written. We have yet to receive any word from Southwark.


I was told by Southwark that the fine would not be increased if our appeal was rejected. In fact, the auto email we received from Southwark confirmed this:



Dear xx,


Thank you for submitting your online challenge or representation regarding Penalty Charge Notice (PCN or parking ticket) reference: xxxxxx.


A copy of your submission is attached for your records.


Your case will be placed on hold and will not progress any further until we have responded to the contents of your challenge or representation. If you have challenged your notice within 14 days from the date of the notice, the case will not increase in cost whilst it is on hold.


Your challenge or representation will be considered and a response will normally be sent to you within 21 days from submission date. If we require any further information when considering your challenge or representation we will contact you.


Yours sincerely


Parking and Traffic Enforcement

Regulatory Services

Southwark Council





I was in touch with both DV Councillors when the fine occurred. I would suggest being in touch with them as well.


Good luck to us all.


I'll post when I hear the outcome of our appeal.

One point re Boomshakes letter, the roundabout with the misleading signs is at the junction with Burbage Road rather than Pickwick Road.


btw those who suggested appealing to local councillors are, IMHO, a little naive. It is the local councillors and their Labour colleagues in the council Cabinet who have instigated these measures and worked with the Council officers to implement them. If they show support for any appeal it will show up their errors.

roywj Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Saw a SUV with gaffer tape over half of the number

> plate this morning driving down Burbage Road.

> Wonder if cameras are checked for this sort of

> thing?


But of course the fines are because motorists are confused...

  • 2 weeks later...

Hello, I've just been caught out by the Dulwich Village camera of doom. I even stopped and dangerously tried to do a three point turn when I saw the sign but so many other cars were passing me, I foolishly thought 'oh it must be fine' and carried on. I've seen boomshake22's fanatastic letter and I'm hoping to appeal successfully. Has anyone else had a positive outcome since?

Thanks!

Would you appeal a speeding fine based on an argument that everyone else was speeding too? I?m sure getting a fine is frustrating but I feel drivers should take responsibility for their actions - especially as you say you saw the sign and understood you needed to turn around.

hoonaloona Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Hello, I've just been caught out by the Dulwich

> Village camera of doom. I even stopped and

> dangerously tried to do a three point turn when I

> saw the sign but so many other cars were passing

> me, I foolishly thought 'oh it must be fine' and

> carried on. I've seen boomshake22's fanatastic

> letter and I'm hoping to appeal successfully. Has

> anyone else had a positive outcome since?

> Thanks!


Have a look on pepipoo website, (don't let the silly name deter you), there are loads of threads on there where they have got people off of these extortionate fines, just put Dulwich village into the search bar and you'll be shocked, then start your own thread, you will get a response, they're good people on there who will help you

Although this thread is dealing with individual penalties those reading it might want to respond to the formal consultation which will decide if the current experimental restrictions are made permanent. The consultation is open until 11 July https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/dulwich-review/

We were also caught out by the camera at the end of Townley Road and also in Dulwich Village. We agree with UIStED that this is obviously a money making scheme for Southwark Council, as the signage is inadequate, and that residents were not informed about the road priority changes.


We were sent 3 PCNs, one for Townley Road and two for Dulwich village. One of the Dulwich village PCNs was dated 50 days after the alleged contravention. The council is legally obliged to send out a PCN within 28 days of a contravention, therefore any PCN dated more than 28 days after the contravention is INVALID, and you do not have to pay the fine. Of the other two, we appealed for the reasons already mentioned (after the 14 day discount period had ended). By law, all issuing authorities have a maximum of 56 days to respond to your appeal. In addition to this, if an authority has it's own stated policy on its response time to an appeal, the are obliged to follow it. Southwark council is legally obliged to respond to email appeals within 21 days. They have still not responded after a month. This means that the PCNs are now invalid.


It's good to know that the council are legally obliged to follow their own stated policies and that they are also obligated to respond within a given timeframe. If they fail to do this the PCN is invalidated. We have seen on various earlier threads that the council in the beginning did respond to appeals but it looks as though they are no longer doing so - this could be because they have already reached a financial target (having made 2.5 million pounds with just 3 cameras over a 3 month period - posted in a previous thread).


We're posting this simply to say what our experience was and to point out that the council also has obligations. If you feel for whatever reason that a PCN has been issued unfairly then ALWAYS APPEAL. If the council do actually respond and reject your appeal within 21 days then you can take the appeal higher, to the London Tribunals, who are independent adjudicators, and will judge the case on its merits in an impartial way.

EDRH1114090399 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> We were also caught out by the camera at the end

> of Townley Road and also in Dulwich Village. We

> agree with UIStED that this is obviously a money

> making scheme for Southwark Council, as the

> signage is inadequate, and that residents were not

> informed about the road priority changes.

>

> We were sent 3 PCNs, one for Townley Road and two

> for Dulwich village. One of the Dulwich village

> PCNs was dated 50 days after the alleged

> contravention. The council is legally obliged to

> send out a PCN within 28 days of a contravention,

> therefore any PCN dated more than 28 days after

> the contravention is INVALID, and you do not have

> to pay the fine. Of the other two, we appealed for

> the reasons already mentioned (after the 14 day

> discount period had ended). By law, all issuing

> authorities have a maximum of 56 days to respond

> to your appeal. In addition to this, if an

> authority has it's own stated policy on its

> response time to an appeal, the are obliged to

> follow it. Southwark council is legally obliged to

> respond to email appeals within 21 days. They have

> still not responded after a month. This means that

> the PCNs are now invalid.

>

> It's good to know that the council are legally

> obliged to follow their own stated policies and

> that they are also obligated to respond within a

> given timeframe. If they fail to do this the PCN

> is invalidated. We have seen on various earlier

> threads that the council in the beginning did

> respond to appeals but it looks as though they are

> no longer doing so - this could be because they

> have already reached a financial target (having

> made 2.5 million pounds with just 3 cameras over a

> 3 month period - posted in a previous thread).

>

> We're posting this simply to say what our

> experience was and to point out that the council

> also has obligations. If you feel for whatever

> reason that a PCN has been issued unfairly then

> ALWAYS APPEAL. If the council do actually respond

> and reject your appeal within 21 days then you can

> take the appeal higher, to the London Tribunals,

> who are independent adjudicators, and will judge

> the case on its merits in an impartial way.



Good info, i'm waiting on 2 appeals for Dulwich village, i lodged appeal on 04/05, so they have 3 days to get back to me, fingers crossed. EDRH is right always appeal and don't vote Labour next May.

Re the 28 day limit EDRH1114090399 quoted there are exceptions.


These may not be current as this is the original legislation but there is an exemption of up to 6 months for the issue of a penalty in regulation 10 of The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) General Regulations 2007 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2007/3483/regulation/10/made and DVLA may well be slow at replying given Covid.


I?ve not heard of a legal obligation to respond in line with Council policy. EDRH1114090399 can you provide details of the Act / Regulations that make this a legal requirement?

alex_b Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Would you appeal a speeding fine based on an

> argument that everyone else was speeding too? I?m

> sure getting a fine is frustrating but I feel

> drivers should take responsibility for their

> actions - especially as you say you saw the sign

> and understood you needed to turn around.


Exactly this. Which other laws are you allowed to break, but get away with if you say "oh, I wasn't looking properly" or "well I don't agree with the law"?!

Hello, I don't live in the neighbourhood any more but still drive through ED/Dulwich for school stuff

I haven't been able to stop and read the road signs carefully but am worried about all these fines and about the risk of accidentally driving down the wrong roads at the wrong time... Could some kind person say exactly where the new restrictions are in Dulwich Village?

thank you!

I've had so many fines now in Dulwich (I no longer live in ED), I've decided to not go there any more for certain shops/cafes - it's too much of a risk. I'm often looking out for people crossing the road, or other perils in the road and therefore haven't noticed the new signs. Where on Southwark website can I find a map of the restrictions?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Last week we had no water for over 24 hours and very little support from Thames Water when we called - had to fight for water to be delivered, even to priority homes. Strongly suggest you contact [email protected] as she was arranging a meeting with TW to discuss the abysmal service
    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...