TfL - as slippery as sin

A congestion charge PCN had a long (and unhappy) life. The issue date of 2 December 2023 was a Saturday and that is enough to invalidate it, a Congestion Charge PCN must be posted on the date of issue as otherwise motorists lose some of their statutory time to respond and it is a straightforward breach of the law. Here is the PCN history in backwards date order:

The PCN went wrong the month after Mr Mustard had made the fornal representations which were to the effect that the motorist had been short changed as to time to respond. TfL decided that what he had written didn't amount to a representation (they aren't the first enforcement authority to try this silliness but none so far has prevailed in their attempt)

Mr Mustard knows the proper procedure to follow inside out and so he fired a warning shot across the bows of TfL clearly pointing out why they were wrong:

That email to a named officer (employee), sent on 11 January, met with a response on 14 February in which TfL said they would send a full response and the penalty would remain on hold.

(The named officer is known to a friend of Mr Mustard's who describes him as usually looking like he is chewing a wasp).

Not on hold for long: on 16 February, a charge certificate was issued which increased the penalty to £270. Ouch.

The issue of a charge certificate made it look to the motorist as if Mr Mustard didn't know what he was doing. He usually does (if he drops a clanger he makes good financially & does not have to put his hand in his pocket very much at all).

On 20 February Mr Mustard emailed the group inbox of TfL (cccorrespondence@tfl.gov.uk) pointing out the error of sending a charge certificate at a time when the file was on hold due to a representation and suggesting that out of fairness TfL would now want to cancel the PCN.

That email didn't do any good either. The penalty was registered by TfL as a debt at the Traffic Enforcement Centre, part of the Northampton County Court (but mostly just a register of supposedly overdue PCNs).

The motorist had to visit a Solicitor and swear a Statutory Declaration that he had made in time representations, which was never in doubt as they were on TfL's files.

It took less than a week for the TEC to cancel the Charge Certificate, the PCN still staying alive in such a situation.

Another fortnight passed and TfL finally cancelled the PCN. If they sent an apology it didn't reach Mr Mustard, via his client, but the case history doesn't show one. Good manners are rather missing in the world of PCNs, they shouldn't be.

The end.

Tfl - congestion zone - seconds out

Mr Mustard was consulted by a lady who enters the congestion charge once a week at the end of the day and is well aware of the times.

She was sent a PCN timed at 17:59 which Mr Mustard thought was a little harsh as the zone ends, allowing free entry, at 18:00. Mr Mustard also remembered the below Barnet decision:

He asked the lady to find the exact time at which she entered and started an Appeal regardless as paying even the 50% (£80) was not palatable for less than 60 seconds of alleged early entry. Having made a Subject Access Request of TfL this was the gobbledegook response received.

Mr Mustard thought that the answer was not the whole truth so he changed tack. A copy of the cctv was requested by the vehicle owner (it is awaited, doubtless it will now be said to have been destroyed which will lead to more enquiries) and he made a Freedom of Information request for the earliest and latest times in recent years.

What we see from the table is that sometime between April 18 and March 19 the leeway provided at the end of the day was reduced from the 2 minutes which was in Mr Musatrd's memory to 1 minute and then sometime during April 19 to zero minutes.

Which faceless functionary made that policy decision? Whoever is was, they have been given too much power.

What we also see is that the TfL answer to the lady who enquired for the exact time to the second was a bare faced lie as they were able to produce bags more information for Mr Mustard if he wanted it, but he already had all he needed.

If you get a congestion charge PCN later than 17:58 I would fight it on the grounds that your car was showing 18:00 and/or that the pips had gone on the car radio. The cameras may be synchronised to the atomic clock at the start of the day but could be out of sync by the end of the day.

The grounds of Appeal prepared by Mr Mustard were these, which you are free to copy for your own case

As soon as TfL saw the grounds of Appeal, they threw in the towel and cancelled the PCN. Their pursuit of a £160 penalty in this situation was a gross abuse of power.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

TfL are a disgrace - in the nature of a guest blog

The facts:

I hope you're well. I'm afraid I have another query for you on behalf of my parents. I will try to keep the facts brief but can provide more detail if needed.

- parents have moved house, new owners called this week to say they have some post for them. Parents collected post to find 2 charge certificates from TfL for non payment of PCNs (congestion charge)
- new owners of house state that no previous correspondence has been received (i.e. The Pcns themselves or any reminders)
- charge certificates state payment required in 14 days (i.e. by 8 august) otherwise they will register it as a debt
- I believe a statutory declaration is required (or two) to say that parents did not receive PCNs?
- reason for not paying congestion charge is that vehicle is registered under blue badge discount for my grandmother however the email sent by TfL to ask whether that should be renewed was sent to my grandfather who sadly passed away last year. Therefore email account not checked and discount expired around march this year.
- parents did have a mail redirect initially but this had stopped by the time PCN issued. However new owners are in touch and would / should have told them if they had post
- my dad (registered keeper) did not update DVLA until recently, however he says (I am asking him to double check this) that when he called them (in July) to update his address they told him they already had new address. Not sure how this is possible but perhaps they obtained it via an alternative source..? 

Any chance of success with this do you think? Presume first would have to attempt statutory declaration then if successful, make representations? Out of interest, when log in to TfL site it still seems to allow us to make reps even though supposedly you cannot do this once charge certificate issued.

Thanks in advance for any help you can give us!

Although Mr Mustard wasn't managing the PCNs he keeps an eye on things. One PCN was settled and the other marched forward through the process to the bailiff. He enquired what had happened.

Thanks for your email. Yes - it was a complete nightmare for my parents as you can imagine. TfL are a disgrace - despite my parents sending in the relevant stat dec signed by a solicitor etc, TfL managed to lose it. My parents then got another statutory declaration signed and witnessed etc and followed up with the TEC who confirmed all received and sent to TfL, and that bailiffs would definitely be put on hold. Next thing they know, very unpleasant bailiff at door a few days later. My parents were already in the middle of a major family crisis so had no option but to pay full amount (it was a weekend and nobody from TfL or TEC available of course).  (2 swearing fees of c. £10 would have had to be paid)

My mum called tfl on the Monday and TfL actually admitted they had failed to correctly notify bailiffs and agreed to cancel ticket. Now my parents are waiting for refund - who knows if it will ever materialise.

Thank you for keeping track of this - I have to say that I despair at organisations like TfL and others whose disorganisation and ruthlessness causes innocent people an extraordinary amount of stress and upset.

Please keep up your good work in helping people to fight back!

The problem is that parking departments automate as much of the process as they can simply because of the volume they deal with. TfL issue around 500,000 PCNs each year. Thus the personal input which would stop most stupid process errors just isn't built into the system and that is wrong.

The parents are out of pocket, they are due an apology for the error in instructing the bailiffs and should be compensated for the worry but that simply doesn't happen.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard