Jump to content

Traffic fines around Dulwich village - has anyone appealed successfully


Recommended Posts

malumbu Wrote:

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

> 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.


Shame they didn?t look at excessive charges from council sponsored schemes??the one at the village roundabout is one of the very worst examples of poor implementations which the council seems more than happy to tolerate as it is good for the coffers and punishes those pesky drivers they so love to hate?..

It was an off thread go at one of the Tory governments Rocks. As for public spirited I am doing that by cutting my carbon footprint having long since stopped unnecessary driving. Although you could also say with all these threads relating to LTNs this has provided a public service in giving good info on where not to drive. I've found it useful and whilst I seem to have had every sort of fixed penalty notice in the past, certainly wont be getting one with the LTNs.


And on all the comments on LTNs being cash cows for local authority what percentage of revenue does this provide? Will be pretty tiny.

  • 2 months later...

I got done on Townley road and got the ?130 ticket.


I then went to a kids party and discovered pretty much every parent there had got similar fines. One had run up ?390 in a morning!


He gave me the number of a successful contest at the London Tribunal - case number - 2210358293 - the PCN was not upheld. Reason being as you enter these areas by the time you are level with the signs it's virtually impossible not to drive through and get a fine!!!


If you quote this number you should have your fines overturned for the same reason.



Alternatively I think anyone living in the village should be made to wear luminous orange vests when they come to East Dulwich and bared from parking or using the shops there.

Hi MCMC - yes, it was me you were speaking to :)


The note above is correct - I was issued with three PCNs, totalling ?390, on consecutive days over half term in June for "33e - Using a route restricted to certain vehicles". The location was at the top of Townley Road, the short section between Calton Avenue and East Dulwich Grove.


I appealed to Southwark and they rejected my case that the signage is inadequate (obscured and misaligned signs on the entry to Townley Road from Lordship Lane).


Incensed, I searched the London Tribunals website (see below, very clunky but the info is there) and found case 2210358293 where the appeal had been upheld.


I submitted my appeal on the London Tribunals website and they upheld it, cancelling all three PCNs. S*rew you Southwark!


My case is not up yet, but if you want to look yourself:

- Go to https://www.londontribunals.gov.uk/about/online-appeals

- Click "Access the appellant portal"

- Click "Statutory Registers"

- Click "Search" under "Environment and Traffic Adjudicators (ETA)"

- Start typing "Southwark" in the "Enforcing authority" box and pick "London Borough of Southwark"

- Type "Townley Road" into "PCN location"

- Click "Search"


Good luck if you appeal also. DM me if you want any more info.

I made a similar appeal earlier this year, i.e. the signage was inadequate, but the appeal was rejected, so I paid the fine anyway.


Will Southwark reverse paid fines, given that others have appealed successfully? It seems a tad daft that those who know a special number get special treatment.

Yup have challenged 35 pcns -all incurred before we received notice of the offence (6-8 weeks before receiving) some have been written off and so me taken to the next level? fingers crossed but not banking on anything. Funny how done were accepted and done not - all challenged on the same basis.
I had to turn into Townley from LL to access Beauval Road to take some shopping to an elderly friend. Would have turned right from LL into Eynella but with bus diversions (12/197) road has been very busy all day and cars having difficulty in finding a space to turn. Hopefully I do not get a ticket! My understanding is that only if you travel the length of Townley (Alleyns end) that you get done.

Yes it is - the threshold is beyond Calton as you head towards the lights.


I noticed recently that they have painted Bus Gate on the road - I don't think that has been there that long has it? I wonder if that is in relation to the Tribunals upholding the appeal and this is the council trying to fix the issue.


Surely if one is upheld on the basis of incorrect or vague signage and then the council takes remedial action then a precedent has been set and all of the fines should be refunded for that junction?


Lots of residents have been telling the council that the signage was not clear enough and it was confusing yet it seems only the threat of tribunals cutting off their cash cow is the catalyst for action!

"Surely if one is upheld on the basis of incorrect or vague signage and then the council takes remedial action then a precedent has been set and all of the fines should be refunded for that junction?"


excellent point ,though no doubt there will be an argument that they are just improving something that was adequate .sigh .

that should be fine - at least I hope it is, we live round there and do that route regularly and have never received a ticket (could be crap postal service of course!).


But this is part of the problem with the signs - the red signs on Lordship Lane say that there is no through road ahead but don't actually tell you exactly where the no through road is - you have to get closer and spot the more detailed sign there, by which time you will have to act sharpish to avoid going the 'banned' way.




Pugwash Wrote:

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

> I had to turn into Townley from LL to access

> Beauval Road to take some shopping to an elderly

> friend. Would have turned right from LL into

> Eynella but with bus diversions (12/197) road has

> been very busy all day and cars having difficulty

> in finding a space to turn. Hopefully I do not get

> a ticket! My understanding is that only if you

> travel the length of Townley (Alleyns end) that

> you get done.

  • 2 months later...
Agh, no post for months and today I get a penalty charge for driving through the village on 28th December which was officially a bank holiday! I assumed that because it was Mon-Fri that would include bank holidays, is that an unreasonable assumption??

Hmm. From the TMOs listed at https://www.southwark.gov.uk/transport-and-roads/traffic-orders-licensing-strategies-and-regulation/traffic-management-orders?chapter=5 I've picked out LSP Dulwich trial Phase 2 (notice dated 15 Oct 2020) as the one that may be the relevant one, and can find no mention in it of bank holidays.


And at https://www.southwark.gov.uk/parking/parking-enforcement-over-christmas-and-on-bank-holidays, mischievously tucked away on a page entitled Parking Enforcement, I find "all traffic regulations will be enforced using CCTV camera" on bank and public holidays.


I don't know if there are any factors that would incline Southwark nevertheless to treat a bank holiday as exceptional. I can see the City of London saying, in the FAQ at https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/services/streets/bank-on-safety, that they don't enforce their own Mon-Fri restriction at the Bank junction on bank holidays; which I read as possibly implying that their TMO, which I can't find, doesn't mention them at all. But even if so, it's only an example of what an LA can do, if they feel like it, for one particular location. Is the Village much different on a bank holiday from any other weekday?

Thanks Ianr, that's useful information. In answer to your last question, my understanding is that the measure is designed to reduce the added congestion at school pick up and drop off on weekdays. In my mind a bank holiday has the same status as a weekend, and I think this is particularly harsh.

Except that the restrictions also apply during school holidays. One would think that the technology exists to lift restrictions out of term time. But then there would be less revenue from fines...



sjsl Wrote:

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

> Thanks Ianr, that's useful information. In answer

> to your last question, my understanding is that

> the measure is designed to reduce the added

> congestion at school pick up and drop off on

> weekdays. In my mind a bank holiday has the same

> status as a weekend, and I think this is

> particularly harsh.

They could simply turn off the cameras when the school hols start and turn them back on when term resumes or if that's too hard not send out fines during school holiday period!


Where there's a will and all that...



Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote:

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

> The technology exists, but there's a limit to how

> much text you can put on a roadsign.

  • 9 months later...

Just received a shocking Penalty Charge fine for £195 for driving on Townley Road at 3:30pm in August.


We had no idea we'd done this, and OK, fair cop, I've now seen the photos online. But.... WE NEVER RECEIVED THE ORIGINAL NOTICE FROM SOUTHWARK. This is not a great surprise, as ED post has been atrocious for several months, we often get things weeks after they were posted.


I've told Southwark we're OK to pay the original £65 fine, but the penalty charge feels outrageous. In this Kafkaesque world, do we have any hope of Southwark agreeing to drop the £130 penalty?

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...