Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Congestion charge
FightBack Forums > Queries > Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices
Sorry if this is in the wrong topic area but as the Congestion Charge is camera controlled and the judicial process is relevant in this case I assume it's OK.
Anyway, got snapped on a Monday morning moving my car which had been within the Zone since the Sunday. I moved the car a matter of 100 yards but came too close to a camera and got snapped. I saw the camera anyway but was under the impression (wrongly) that it was only entering the Zone in the prescribed hours that incurred a Penalty Charge.
Since I was already in it and had to move my car only a matter of 100 yards to a parking bay I thought it was OK.
OK, I know different now. Since I was on holiday when the first PCN came for £50 I'm now up to £100 as I didn't get the chance to appeal or reply within the prescribed 14 days.
I have appealled since and have the reply today. A big no no. Got to pay.
They say I should know what the regulations are.
I'm no dummy. Why would I deliberately avoid trying to pay £8 and get bumped up to a much higher charge? Everything I have read and everything I've seen on TV reports made reference to people getting to work earlier to avoid the charge etc.
Because of this I was under the false impression that I would be OK within the Zone as long as I hadn't crossed the boundary.
Boring stuff I know but I'm wondering if anyone out there knows of any useful stuff for a defence.
I really think that as the regualtions surrounding the operation of the Congestion Zone aren't displayed or freely available to visitors from well outside the area then they are complicit in the poor operation of the scheme.
I mean, we all know the general driving regulations as these are countrywide as too are the rules of the Highway Code. We all know that if a road sign says 50 then we are breaking the law above it, but when we go into a variably operated scheme such as the Congestion Zone which has no clearly displayed signs of operational requirements then surely the rules aren't so easy to understand.
Is there a law which states that such operational signage must be displayed in order to implement to the scheme?
Any thoughts and help would be appreciated.
the regulations are clear it is being in the zone on the public highway
during the hours of operation that leads to a requirement to pay

it is not crossing into the zone but being in the zone
thats why it is a congestion zone and not a congestion tollgate

there may be defctes in their PCN, NTO or rejection
but i doubt it - tfl appear to follow the regs on CC
(unlike parking)

patas deals wth congestion charge appeals

lookng at the cases it doesnt look good for you sadly

see here

and in general

as for a gerneal requiremnt for info i think tfl have fulfilled
there are signs and boards at entrances to london, leaflets at shops
and carparks and the internet

i suggest you vote against ken
Ah! good old Ken "if I ever get any powers again I will ban the car" Livingstone.

I have previously fought TFL for a CCPCN for my son in Jan 2005 and won, but I never ever found out exactly on what point, or indeed what I had said to make them back down. They were most insistent and deliberately obstructive and then backed down immediately on me sending in the appeal to PATAS.

I had several issues as he was clocked at about 7.03am and the photo was a numberplate with the rest of the background virtually black, I argued that I could knock up similar on photoshop in about ten minutes and how did we know, where was the actual proof and indeed records that this timing was indeed correct.

When I asked for their evidence they told me that I needed to make a subject access request under the data protection act and pay them £10. I declined as it was my view that I was entitled to see evidence on which they wished to rely without charge and that no to do so was a breach of the right to see evidence against you. I also argued that they were using the DPA incorrectly and they had no right to withold evidence unless I sent them money.

I also had an issue with a PDF document I downloaded at the time from the TFL or CC london site. It was a document telling you all about the CC charge. I still have it but I'm not sure how to post it.

Within it it said:-
This booklet tells you everything you need to know about the congestion charge, as simply and clearly as possible, so next time you drive into the congestion charging zone you only pay the £5 daily charge, and not a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN).

I argued that this statement meant the was a deliberate and definate presumption(so next time) that they were going to catch out the unsuspecting motorist visiting London on their first encounter with the CC. This booklet may have been revised for the £8 charge but there again perhaps not. The document was called cc-retail.pdf

I did write to my MP and gave him a hard time but he was less than useless. He wrote a note to Ken and Ken wrote the usual propoganda, which my MP passed on to me. I did piss him off a bit I think when I subsequently told him:-

"I’m afraid that your involvement in this matter seems to be purely that of an errand boy passing on messages between interested parties. Had I wished to receive mere propaganda from our ‘Ken’, I am sure I could have managed that for myself".

By the tone of the reply he was not amused, still who cares, muppet politicians, I can do my own errands thank you very much.

Unfortunately, the site that dealt with fighting the CC charge was hit by hackers and the site has never returned, so you're pretty much on your own on this. I also argued like you perhaps that the information within the zone for strangers to the city are virtually non-existent and it is not made clear of how, when and where to pay. It was also argued by them you should have found out, but how. Would everyone know that it is TFL you have to contact, it's on the internet they cry, yet only around 50% of the households at the time had internet access, so where do you start and just how are you supposed to know. Look into your crystal ball perhaps.

I can't tell you the rights or wrongs of my arguments, only what I did. Obviously, at least one of the things I said worked, but only after submission of the appeal and the £50 was refunded.

Just checked for the booklet, its changed so that one's out the window then. Still want to charge for the evidence though via subject access request.

Almost forgot, did use the BOR defence as well at the time.
Desert Fox
How do you pay the congestion charge ? Buggeredifiknow!!!
QUOTE (Desert Fox @ Mon, 11 Sep 2006 - 15:58) *
How do you pay the congestion charge ? Buggeredifiknow!!!

You're in Leeds for Gods sake, you aren't supposed to know; thats the whole point, they don't want 8 quid, they want 50 or 100 quid. The congestion charge is a joke, its made London much worse to get through. Kens intention was to screw the motorist for his pet plans. He doesn't like the car, possibly 'cos he can't drivre himself. Initially it was £5 and he didn't envisage any price increase for 10 years. Well that didn't last long as he soon discovered that it was not as profitable as he first thought, hence the increase to £8. A staggering 37% of its income in 2004 came from penalties, had it not been for these fines then he'd have been paying out instead.

The CC zone is now to be extended further after public consultation. The public consultation however showed conclusively that the majority did not want any extension to the CC zones but that hasn't stopped them still carrying on with it. Looks like democracy only counts when it agrees with what these elected officials wish to do, otherwise just ignore it and carry on regardless. So, we are actually more aligned in this country to dictatorship rather than democracy.

The CC is administered by TFL (Transport for London). The scheme is administered by Capita, a company headed by one of Tonies Cronies. They have a lot of public contracts as I understand it, some of which are spectacular cock ups and a waste of taxpayers money. Still, he a Labour Party donor so thats all right then.

Capita get a cut of every PCN they collect so they have a vested interest in pursuing you for these penalty charges, don't expect any sympathy or mitagating circumstances crap, they 'aint interested. They are nothing more than corporate bullies and moreover seem to be a law unto themselves. They probably make the councils look like Saints.

TFL were criticised in 2004 by the adjudicators (PATAS) for the lack of signage telling people how to pay the charge, looks like nothings changed here then. The system is clearly designed to entrap the stranger/visitor to London at least on first encounter. Not to do so would leave the whole system generating no income whatsoever for TFL and Ken, hence the increase in the daily charge and an extension of the zone as well.

The main thing for anyone to do before travelling in the dreaded motor car to London is to check it all out on their website ( and plan your journey around it if you don't want your wallet stripped. Once you've found out about it tell everyone else you know and get them to pass it on as well.

With the demise of Sod U Ken, the fightback forum on this, perhaps the moderators of this board may wish to make a new category for the CC penalties. There is a clear need to cripple the whole of this on the spot fine culture.

In the meantime, lets all hope that Robin de Crittenden succeeds in his BOR challenge, then possibly all these instant penalties for anything and everything will fly out of the window.
Just to keep you up to date with events, when I received the Rejection of Appeal, it asked me to send in a copy of the front and back of my Blue Badge. I told them that I was a holder and had I known that special dispensation was given to pre-registered holders I would have made sure I was registered too.
Anyway they say that if I sent in my badge they will take another look at my appeal.
I'm a bit hopeful on this as they really didn't need to do this. They could have just let things lie and have me send in a hundred quid or make an appeal to the next level.
All of this belies the fact that this is absolute piracy of the highest order. I pay my road taxes, same as everyone else so why should I be denied the opportunty to travel on a publicly funded road anyway.
Having spent some time reading through the Robin de Crittenden case, I can see this extraction of monies from people follows the same sort of reasoning.
Might just try it myself if they reject my appeal.
I like a fight and have recently got away with a couple of speeding fines, including an official apology from the Chief of Police of Northumbria after I complained at police harrassment.

Anyway, London is a bloody nightmare. I have to visit a couple of times a year and I'm almost frightened to go into it now. Two parking tickets and a bloody wheel clamp last year and a hundred quid looking at me for the Congestion Zone now.
We spend something like half a million quid in the fashion houses around Great Titchfield Street for our business and this is the thanks you get for bringing wealth to the area.
Will let you know if my appeal is accepted.
Happy Motoring..........
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2020 Invision Power Services, Inc.