You can explain away a single instance as a misunderstanding. Gets much more difficult with multiples of the same offence.
Since the offence is a case of totting up the days of late payments and the Villa Embargo was for 30 days I assume the Man City one only needed to be 1 day to take it back over the 30 days. If this is the case then surely if the Villa one is successfully contested then we'd be only 1 day over?