Jump to content

Traffic fines around Dulwich village - has anyone appealed successfully


Recommended Posts

Giacomelli Wrote:

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

> 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?


https://www.southwark.gov.uk/transport-and-roads/improving-our-streets/live-projects/our-healthy-streets/our-healthy-streets-dulwich

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi Bookshake


Your attachement opens up as symbols on my machine. Could you attach the copy?

I've just been fined for driving through there on Bank Holiday Monday, which surely is pushing it even for them!


Thanks

A small landscaping business has just been hit with a flurry of fines - but they have taken 2 months to arrive which means they have been accruing loads in the interim. Please no one suggest they use a bicycle to transport heavy materials?. Looking at appealing as this feels just wrong for there to he such a delay in sending out
I also appealed in May but I've heard nothing yet. Having done some research the signage doesn't comply with the 2016 Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions. There's just not enough warning, nor adequate time to process the restriction while safely trying to get round the roundabout. Will keep you posted...

tiddles Wrote:

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

> A small landscaping business has just been hit

> with a flurry of fines - but they have taken 2

> months to arrive which means they have been

> accruing loads in the interim. Please no one

> suggest they use a bicycle to transport heavy

> materials?. Looking at appealing as this feels

> just wrong for there to he such a delay in sending

> out


From what's written above in this thread, the council are legally obliged to issue a PCN within 28 days of the supposed offence. Otherwise it's invalid. I haven't researched this myself but I'm sure it could be easily checked.

I take it you're referring to EDRH1114090399's assertion above, at https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,2180997,2209151#msg-2209151, which s/he posted in several threads. I posted a rejoinder to it, https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,2180997,2203886#msg-2203886 after its first appearance, as has AylwardS, above.

tiddles Wrote:

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

> Thanks Alan medic x


Hi tiddles. Hope you read the post following mine. There are exceptions to the 28 day rule apparently, which the Council could fall back on. So say a couple of well informed posters above.

I've been caught out by this and paid it, begrudgingly. I rarely drive around there and wasn't aware of the restrictions. I think if Southwark genuinely wanted people not to get fined they'd put a clear warning on the entrance to the roundabout rather than one you might see only when you're committed (or don't see at all because you're concentrating on the road.

Alan Medic Wrote:

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

> Well I appealed. Anyone say how long it takes to

> get a verdict?



I appealed in early May and have just received a response (appeal rejected sadly), so the backlog seems to currently be around 6 - 7 weeks.


They do seem to put a decent effort into the response though and generally respond to each point raised, so kudos to the fines team at Southwark. Nice to see the council working a bit for their revenue.

boomshake22 Wrote:

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

> 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.


The Council do not have to give any reason for cancelling a PCN - cancellation from their side is 'discretionary'.


It is therefore probably not worth going back to them after you have paid a fine and saying 'yes but someone else said ...'


The only successful approach is to make a polite representation - as legally sound as possible - at the right time on your own behalf.


The reason they make such a fortune is because most people are not experience, dogged, or informed enough to make representations in exactly the right way to get the PCN cancelled. This is all part of the approach set out by those in charge of generating income for the Council, combined with their legal team which will know very clearly what they can and cant get away with at the highest level. ie if someone were to take the legal process to the very end. That is where a judge would rule in favour of Boom - whose expert letter would have won the case, so it is a simple decision for Southwark to cancel such a powerful articulate representation with that kind of legal weight.


Fairness and reasonableness has got nothing to do with it - look over at the thread of the Dulwich Forum on this and lots of people careworkers, parents not familiar with the area trying to drive their kids to the Herne Hill velodrome... all have been caught by the system. The press ought to be involved and challenge the Council to justify their rule making, and NAME who is responsible for conceiving and running this revenue generating scheme.


Boom's letter has the imprimature of a barrister level specialised traffic legal expert - expertise like this is available for free on ( google Pepipoo Fightback forum) where the are a bunch of very very experience traffic solicitors peer reviewing and comparing each other's advice.

  • 4 weeks later...

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



Hi @boomshake22 - thanks to your excellent letter, we?ve just had 7(!) PCNs overturned from May with the exact same circumstances.

We are absolutely thrilled.


We would love to say thank you as your letter really helped us build a decent case. Will send you a private message!

Another message of thanks to Boomshake, as the PCN I received has been withdrawn, following my submission to LBS using Boomshake's letter as a basis.


We are now in the postion where Alleyns School is not operating until 7th September, however Townley Rd cannot be used during the restricted hours.


I rarely use my car locally, prefering the push bike, however I have now stuck a post-it to the dashboard to remind me to use a different route, along E Dulwich Grove to drive west. I do enjoy a bit of long distance cycling, and 2 weeks ago cycled ED to St Austell in Cornwall. Its around 260miles and took about 22hours, overnight. Unfortunately once you get to Exeter, Dartmoor has to be climbed, and frankly this is an extreme method of avoiding a PCN!

>

>

> parents not familiar with the area trying to drive

> their kids to the Herne Hill velodrome...


How very ironic. Used to cycle mine there.


And talking about cycling 22 hours overnight and 260 miles Adrian - sounds a bit masochistic! I did 300 km overnight in Sweden once, never again.....

doogsey Wrote:

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

> Alan Medic Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Well I appealed. Anyone say how long it takes

> to

> > get a verdict?

>

>

> I appealed in early May and have just received a

> response (appeal rejected sadly), so the backlog

> seems to currently be around 6 - 7 weeks.

>

> They do seem to put a decent effort into the

> response though and generally respond to each

> point raised, so kudos to the fines team at

> Southwark. Nice to see the council working a bit

> for their revenue.


I had my appeal rejected though I'm thinking of disputing it. The email stating this was actually from a company called Apcoa Parking, though the use a Southward Parking email address. So I think it's fair to assume the Council is not dealing with these but have outsourced it. The Apcoa Group is made up of very wealthy companies (not surprisingly). The Ultimate Holding Company isn't even in the UK.


This sign was used in their email stating that it's on College Road, which is the direction we approached Dulwich Village from. Has anyone any idea how long the sign has been there since I've no recollection of seeing it in early June?


file.php?5,file=397726

Alan Medic Wrote:

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


> I had my appeal rejected though I'm thinking of

> disputing it. The email stating this was actually

> from a company called Apcoa Parking, though the

> use a Southward Parking email address. So I think

> it's fair to assume the Council is not dealing

> with these but have outsourced it. The Apcoa Group

> is made up of very wealthy companies (not

> surprisingly). The Ultimate Holding Company isn't

> even in the UK.


I think pretty much all councils outsource parking and other traffic enforcement these days.


> This sign was used in their email stating that

> it's on College Road, which is the direction we

> approached Dulwich Village from. Has anyone any

> idea how long the sign has been there since I've

> no recollection of seeing it in early June?

>

> https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/file.php?

> 5,file=397726


I?m pretty certain it has been there since the restrictions were imposed or very shortly afterwards. It was definitely there in June. I run past there very regularly and it was one of the reasons I was surprised people were claiming the signage was inadequate.

Rockets Wrote:

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

> Alan, did you get the ticket for going along

> Dulwich Village or Burbage. If it was the latter

> you could claim the sign on Burbage is obscured

> because of its position so forward on the

> junction.


Dulwich Village, Rockets.

The government before last (or before that) was supposed to deal with excessive enforcement charges, aimed at the private clampers. Not sure if they delivered in that manifesto commitment. They were also keen on reducing town centre parking charges, scuppering a wonderful park and ride scheme in Coventry where electric buses ferried people into the high street. Not very joined up thinking from national government.

I have read Boomshakes excellent letter and since talked to a few others who have had success. All used different grounds for appeal and this suggests that there are distinct benefits in sharing information on successful appeals.


I am willing to collate all the relevant information from those who have succeeded. It can then be compiled into a set of guidelines that can be made available on-line.


So, If you have has success, please send me a PM with the details. Please remove any personal information or car reg details.

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

    • 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.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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