DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so ...
*****************************************************
#Post#: 111959--------------------------------------------------
TFL - Congestion Charge -Independent Adjudicator stage
DIR By: whynot
Date: March 3, 2026, 3:34 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi all,
I would really appreciate some advice regarding a Congestion
Charge PCN we received from Transport for London. The case has
now been referred to the independent adjudicator at London
Tribunals.
We did not intend to formally challenge the charge; we simply
wanted to try our luck and ask for a gesture of goodwill.
PCN: LP34347097
REG: DL67HLE
- Last letter from Congestion Charge: Congestion Charge
HTML https://imgpile.com/p/7yVmFMm
---------------------------------------------------------
Timeline:
- In September 2025, the registered keeper received a Penalty
Charge Notice (PCN) for the Congestion Charge.
- In our representation, we asked for the matter to be
considered as a gesture of goodwill and confirmed that we were
willing to pay the original Congestion Charge fee for entering
the zone.
- Within 2 days, we submitted a representation based on
mitigation and discretion (as stated: “If none of the six
statutory grounds apply, you may still make a representation
explaining your circumstances and we will carefully consider
these.”).
- We never received a Notice of Rejection from TfL.
- In December, we received a Statutory Declaration form, which
was completed in January and later accepted by the court.
- Now we have received a letter from TfL (dated 20/02, delivered
on 2 March) stating:
“We have reviewed your application and the processing of the PCN
and have decided we wish to proceed with its enforcement.”
---------------------------------------------------------
Key details:
- On the same day we submitted the representation, both my
partner and I created Congestion Charge accounts.
- I also set up Auto Pay that same day and mentioned this in my
representation.
- The representation was submitted via the TfL website.
- Unfortunately, I did not receive an email confirmation after
submitting the representation. Because of that, I submitted it a
second time to make sure it had gone through. However, I did not
receive confirmation for the second submission either. This may
indicate there were issues with the TfL website at the time,
particularly as TfL now states that they never received any
representation from us.
- On the same day, I messaged my partner on Facebook confirming
that I had submitted the representation and shared details of it
there. I have logs and screenshots available.
---------------------------------------------------------
My questions:
- Would this be sufficient evidence to potentially achieve a
positive outcome with the independent adjudicator?
- What evidence should we now provide to the adjudicator?
- How do we properly contact or submit additional information to
the adjudicator?
- What outcomes can we realistically expect in this situation?
Could the adjudicator decide that:
We must pay the current £270 charge?
We only need to pay the original £90 PCN amount?
We are allowed to pay just the original Congestion Charge fee
for that day?
Or that nothing is payable?
- Also, do we need to clearly state what outcome we are seeking
in our appeal (for example, cancellation of the PCN or
permission to pay the original Congestion Charge only), or will
the adjudicator determine this automatically based on the case?
Any guidance or similar experiences would be greatly
appreciated. Please let me know if I should share anything more.
Thank you in advance.
#Post#: 111960--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL - Congestion Charge -Independent Adjudicator stage
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: March 3, 2026, 3:47 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The case has been sent to the adjudicator as you made a
statutory declaration presumably on the grounds you made reps
but didn't get a reply.
The outcome which will probably be a reissue of the PCN.
Call London Tribunals and check the response will reach you -
are the address and email correct.
What are the PCN number and car VRM.
#Post#: 111981--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL - Congestion Charge -Independent Adjudicator stage
DIR By: whynot
Date: March 3, 2026, 5:00 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: stamfordman link ---
>
> The case has been sent to the adjudicator as you made a
statutory declaration presumably on the grounds you made reps
but didn't get a reply.
>
> The outcome which will probably be a reissue of the PCN.
>
> Call London Tribunals and check the response will reach you -
are the address and email correct.
>
> What are the PCN number and car VRM.
>
--- End Quote ---
Right, that makes sense. They’ll likely reissue the PCN, I’ll
submit a representation again, and they’ll probably reject it.
PCN: LP34347097
VRM: DL67HLE
#Post#: 111983--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL - Congestion Charge -Independent Adjudicator stage
DIR By: stamfordman
Date: March 3, 2026, 5:13 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I don't know what happened but there is no record of your
representation, and it went as far as bailiff.
HTML https://i.ibb.co/sJ9WkQgR/Screenshot-2026-03-03-at-23-09-45.png
#Post#: 112025--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL - Congestion Charge -Independent Adjudicator stage
DIR By: tincombe
Date: March 4, 2026, 7:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If you made your statutory declaration under the grounds of
'made reps but did not receive a notice of rejection', then this
regulation applies IMO:
Where a declaration has been served under paragraph (2)(b) or
(c),[2(c) being 'made reps..' etc.] the charging authority shall
refer the case to the adjudicator who may give such directions
as he considers appropriate.
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2001/2313/regulation/19/made
IMO, you are not at adjudication, the authority has referred the
matter to the adjudicator for 'directions'. These are likely to
be that you should provide evidence to the adjudicator that you
submitted reps(because the authority's evidence says that you
did not). If you convinced them-by submission of written
evidence- then the matter would be registered as an appeal. If
you did not, then the adjudicator would likely direct you to pay
the full penalty without an appeal being heard.
IMO, there's no option to be issued with a fresh PCN because
your grounds were not related.
TfL's response to you is misleading as regards what happens, but
this isn't a defence. Your next communication should be from the
tribunal and, as posted by stamfordman, I suggest you contact
them (the tribunal) to find out the current position
#Post#: 112903--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL - Congestion Charge -Independent Adjudicator stage
DIR By: whynot
Date: March 11, 2026, 3:23 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
First of all, thank you all for your engagement and for taking
the time to help – I really appreciate the advice and support.
TfL’s position is that they have never received my
representation. This might be true if their
website/representation form malfunctioned on that day, but I
don’t think potential IT issues on their side should strengthen
their case.
---------------------------------------------------------
I have now received a letter from the tribunal.
I plan to respond and would like to include my wife as a
witness.
Could anyone advise what evidence I should provide at this stage
and what format the tribunal expects when submitting documents?
I would like to include the following evidence:
- Email confirmation from TfL that two accounts were created
- Email confirmation that Auto Pay was set up
- A screenshot from Messenger showing that I wrote
“representation was sent today at 2 pm”, together with the full
representation attached in that message
---------------------------------------------------------
Considering all of the above, I still think it would be fair for
me to pay the original Congestion Charge fee. Should I suggest
this in my written communication to the tribunal, or is it
better to raise it during the hearing?
Below is the letter I received from the tribunal.
HTML https://imgpile.com/p/XNKlSJc#Gli96TE
HTML https://imgpile.com/p/XNKlSJc#P2ucMPQ
HTML https://imgpile.com/p/XNKlSJc#LX2NkSC
#Post#: 112928--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL - Congestion Charge -Independent Adjudicator stage
DIR By: fraser.mitchell
Date: March 11, 2026, 7:30 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
You are at London Tribunals, so the maximum amount you are
likely to have to pay is the PCN penalty, but you won't get the
discount option.
It is important to put all your representation arguments to the
adjudicator, but I suggest you include your initial reps if you
still have them. Whatever you do, do NOT opt for a papers-based
adjudication; always opt for a hearing. Hearings are by phone
or, (if you have the kit) by video. TfL are almost certain not
to turn up, it will be you and the adjudicator.
#Post#: 112954--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL - Congestion Charge -Independent Adjudicator stage
DIR By: tincombe
Date: March 12, 2026, 5:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The adjudicator must apply the law and IMO the only options are:
To allow your appeal under one of the grounds which an
adjudicator may consider;
To reject your appeal;
To reject but make a recommendation to the authority.
As regards the third option, I am not aware of any
recommendation which includes paying the congestion charge
only,so I think you're in for the penalty or the discount*.
An adjudicator may not consider mitigation/discretion because
these powers are reserved to the authority alone.
In effect, it's now as if on receipt of a PCN you are appealing
directly to the adjudicator therefore, as per Incandescent, it's
the full chebang. IMO, the style and content of the reps which
weren't received are a guide to you only. You should treat this
as de novo i.e. as if for the first time.
So, what were the circumstances of incurring the penalty and why
was the charge not paid within the allowed time etc.
#Post#: 117317--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL - Congestion Charge -Independent Adjudicator stage
DIR By: whynot
Date: April 29, 2026, 4:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
All,
We have received the Adjudicator’s Decision. I will paste the
important parts of the letter here, as I do not fully understand
what has happened, except that we need to pay TFL but we are not
really sure why the amount is £180 (the initial PCN was £90).
Is there anything else I can do here? Pay and complain to TfL?
Is there any reasonable approach for this case?
"The adjudicator, having considered the evidence submitted by
the parties, has decided that the appeal against
liability for the charge should be refused. The reasons for the
adjudicator’s decision are enclosed.
The amount of the penalty charge payable is set out in the
reasons and must be paid and received by Transport
for London within the specified deadline."
"If the penalty has not been paid within 28 days, Transport for
London can issue a charge certificate increasing
the full penalty charge by a further 50%."
"Adjudicator's Reasons
1. This appeal was determined as a personal appeal following the
Appellant filing a statutory
declaration.
Issue
2. The responsibility is initially upon Transport for London
(TFL) to demonstrate that there may have
been a 'contravention' that is a breach of the Congestion
Charging Scheme.
3. If TFL produces this evidence to establish that there is a
potential contravention, then the
responsibility moves to the Appellant to satisfy me that, it is
more likely than not, that one of the six
grounds of appeal as set out in the relevant regulations is made
out. The issue in this case is whether
the penalty charge is payable by the Appellant.
Law
4. The law relating to penalties imposed in regards to the
Congestion Charge Zone is set out in the
Greater London Congestion Charging Scheme Order 2004 as amended.
The relevant regulations
relating the grounds for appeal are Regulation 13(3) of the Road
User Charging (Enforcement and
Adjudication) (London) Regulations 2001, as amended.
The Appellant's case
5. The Appellant states that they had to travel into central
London with their 7 week old baby to attend
the embassy. They relied on google maps that indicated that the
ULEZ charge but that their
vehicle was ULEZ compliant but did not highlight that they were
entering the Congestion charging
zone. She says that they live outside of London. She explains
that due to the traffic and baby being
unsettled, they did not notice the road markings indicating the
Congestion zone. She requests that the
penalty is cancelled and that they are happy to pay the daily
charge. She has now set up Auto Pay.
Transport for London's case
6. Transport for London assert that the Appellant's vehicle was
recorded as travelling within the
congestion zone within the charging hours on the 2nd September
2025. Furthermore, that it is the
legal duty of the registered keeper of a vehicle to make
themselves aware of any charges that may be
in existence along their route. Transport for London state that
motorists are made aware when they
are about to cross the boundary of the Congestion Charging Zone
by entry and exit road traffic signs.
Findings of fact
7. There is no dispute that on the date in question, the
Appellant's vehicle was used within the
Congestion charging zone. It is also agreed that no Congestion
Charge payment had been made for
that date.
8. The Appellant states that she was unaware of the congestion
charge on his route. She refers to the
circumstances on the day. These are mitigating circumstances
that I am unable to take into account
(Walmsley v TFL & Others EWCA Civ 1540).
9. I find that it was the Appellant's responsibility to be aware
of road signs and charges. There are
advance warning signs and congestion charge road signs at the
entrance to the charging zones. I do
consider that the signage was compliant with the Department for
Transport standards in line with the
Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. Drivers should not solely rely
on satellite navigation systems to
alert them of road charges.
10. The law imposes a strict liability on the registered keeper
to pay the charge. I find that the
An independent tribunal that decides appeals against
congestion charging penalties and low emission zone penalties in
London
Road User Charging Adjudicators are supported by London
Tribunals, a service provided by London Councils
Calls to London Tribunals will be recorded for training and
quality purposes
Appellant's vehicle was used within the charging zone. The daily
charge must be paid by midnight on
the third charging day following the date of entry, otherwise
the penalty charge becomes payable. As
a result, I find that that the penalty charge of £180 is
applicable in these circumstances. I do not have
a discretion to reduce the amount of penalty charge or allow an
appeal as a gesture of
goodwill.
11. For the reasons given, I refuse this appeal. None of the six
grounds of appeal set out in
Regulation 13(3) of the relevant regulations have been made out.
The Appellant says that she was
unaware of the Congestion charge on her route, this does not
amount to a ground of appeal.
12. I find accordingly that the Appellant as the registered
keeper of the vehicle is directly liable to
Transport for London for payment of this penalty charge.
Payment Amount
13. Transport for London confirmed in the case summary that the
penalty to be paid is £180 in respect
of this contravention, if paid and received within 28 days of
the date of this letter. If full payment is not
made by this date to Transport for London, then the outstanding
amount will increase and Transport
for London will be able to pursue the normal enforcement
procedures.
xxxxx
Adjudicator appointed under Regulation 3 of the Road User
Charging (Enforcement and Adjudication)
(London) Regulations 2001 (as amended)."
#Post#: 117319--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL - Congestion Charge -Independent Adjudicator stage
DIR By: tincombe
Date: April 29, 2026, 5:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
We have received the Adjudicator’s Decision. I will paste the
important parts of the letter here, as I do not fully understand
what has happened, except that we need to pay TFL but we are not
really sure why the amount is £180 (the initial PCN was £90).
Is there anything else I can do here? Pay and complain to TfL?
Is there any reasonable approach for this case?
The amount is £180 because this is the penalty, not £90 as was
stated in numerous posts i.e. the full penalty.
You lost because essentially your appeal went to mitigation
which the adjudicator cannot as a matter of law consider.
The direction is to pay the £180 within the specified period.
IMO, given that TfL did not have a record of your
representations in the first instance, that you didn't engage
with TfL after receiving the Charge Certificate and that they
were put to the trouble of engaging bailiffs, I'm not surprised
they wanted to pursue you.
Unless anyone can find serious fault with the adjudicator's
decision such that you could successfully pursue a review*, then
IMO you have to pay I'm afraid.
*- I hesitate to even raise this because you might want to delve
into it and eat into your time for paying the penalty because
asking for a review does not of itself halt the 28-day clock.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1