Sadly if you are a visitor from somewhere else in the country and not sure where the area starts you can wander into the area and the first thing you know about it is a £180 fine on your doormat..that is so unfair..why can't it just be the £12.50...its nothing but a legalised rip off for motorists...
Visited London a month or so ago (I'm a Northerner) and I found the whole system very confusing, apparently the vehicle I was driving was LEZ exempt - that surprised me as it was a 3l diesel engine car. I tried to pay any fees on the day (it was on expenses anyway - though I morally object to it and probably wouldn't have paid it personally) but the website was unable to process my attempt to pay.
@@matty_mcmattface Most cars and vans newer than 2016 will be exempt regardless of engine size. Euro 6c I believe, but I may be talking rubbish as I drive an EV now.
@@matty_mcmattface It's designed to be, ULEZ isn't supposed to be user friendly or in any way fair, it's designed as part of the war against motorists using the excuse of a climate fraud as justification, especially targeting poorer people.
@@st200ol That makes sense it was a 2017/18 car - but it makes no sense for emissions surely? I have the same car myself (but 2012 model) and 2l engine - so I'd have to pay for a smaller engine if I'd used my own car?
I got hit by this on my birthday last year, went to Wembley arena for a show, it was dark, i planned my route around it, there was an accident on a junction so i went around the accident missed my turn and went 200 yards down the road and turned around. Yep you guessed it, that 200 yard stretch was in ULEZ and i got hit by the full fine. I challenged it, got nowhere as i didnt deny being in it, they wouldnt let me just pay the fee, i had to pay the fine, no less…this is outrageous!
There almost no depths Khans Council tax can be stolen, you can be sure Khans allies own the manufacturers of the equipment, its only private owners that lose from damage and theft
Sadly no, this is not the case. The Bladerunners aren't actually doing anything as you underestimate just how local and national govts waste your near unlimited taxpayer money (as you contiue to pay tax) by continuously buying new cameras, put armour on it and now pay security firms to protect it. The REAL solution is to not pay any charges and fines, sign your logbook owner to someone else with you as a named driver and get smart with dealing with scum bailiffs. Bladerunners won't save you.
it makes so much money, it will last forever. Look at the Dartford Crossing. It was promised that fee would be collected for few years oncr the bridge had paid for itself. However, they like a revenue and continue just to increased.
In August this year my brother, from the South West, was hit with a £570 fine for driving into the ULEZ zone just before midnight and he left around 01:00. He was charged for two days for one excursion. I wrote to TfL and mentioned the Noel Wilcox tribunal and asked them to provide evidence where the charging zone started. Noel Wilcox won his appeal on the grounds the TfL ULEZ signage was not legally compliant. These were the same signs my brother passed through. We are still awaiting a response.
The two day charge is certainly unfair for an hour and on that basis well worth appealing. If he didn't know he had entered or was forced to enter and the double charged that's insult added to injury.
I have experienced many appeals, and won most.!, the difficulty is that the council, or tfl, will treat you with contempt, will not help at all, and make things confusing. It actually requires a strong will to fight those money-grabbing *****.
Every time I have won an apeal of any PCN. I get a letter saying, in this circumstance we are willing to waive but don't you do it again you naughty boy. They never admit guilt from their side.
An aspect of such problems, and ULEZ is only the latest, can often be that the citizen's real conflict may turn out to be with the worst kind of jumped up council bureaucracy (there are better kinds, who tend to move on.) But some so drunk with petty power, they'll take a system they know is a crock, and desperately spend endless amounts of public money rather than surrender that power.
Vehicle tax was SUPPOSED to be based on emissions... The Chancellor sent that lie up in flames when he decided that zero emission vehicles would be liable for tax from 2025 and retroactively applied to anything built since 2017.
Before the ULEZ became as large as it is, my son was delivering a motorcycle in the LEZ which we had an account for and they tried to charge us for the ULEZ charge, but we pointed out that the direction of travel coupled with the fact that all of the signs for the ULEZ area were on our right proved that we did in fact not enter the area in question. We sent a copy of the dash cam footage and heard no more, this was 2019.
Ulez was only meant to be installed in high traffic areas.. but now they have vans driving around to catch people wherever they want.. if thats not a racket then i dont know what is councils arent allowed to use vans to fine people for speeding only police can do that yet the councils still did it.. all this ULEZ stuff is clearly a violation of every day life.
@davecooper3238 you mean passing an arbitrary emissions level that can be changed at a whim, technically very difficult to meet but easy to keep on increasing the standard.
@@jeffzuess9149 The London ULEZ is based around a vehicle’s Euro rating. ICE vehicles are being designed to become less polluting as the years pass. An area’s ( city, town etc ) max pollution level is set by law. The local area are responsible to comply with the law. Note. Euro ratings are standard worldwide.
@@davecooper3238 My vehicle is Euro 4 compliant and despite having a letter from TFL confirming this they then slapped more fines later claiming it is not. Even though I provided manufacturer certificate showing indeed the vehicle is Euro 4 compliant.. still fighting with TFL....
I recently successfully appealed a Birmingham ULEZ charge via the adjudicator. My defence was simply based on the fact that the photographic evidence merely confirmed the location of my vehicle at a certain time, but none of the photographs included any ULEZ signage, so I merely questioned what proof they had that the correct signage was in place at the time of the alleged offence and that the signage was clearly visible. The council subsequently accepted the appeal but gave no reason or explanation. I can only assume that perhaps they did not wish to set a precedent with the adjudicator on the basis that photographic proof rarely or never shows signage. I wonder if a similar defence could be used for other offences such as speeding for example.
A very very good response you gave there and I can confirm that your assumption is very likely correct, I recently received a PCN notice from my local council for not displaying a residents parking permit, the ticket officer did take multiple photographs of signage in the area in order to prove I had been correctly notified of the need to comply with the local restrictions on parking in the area and was therefore liable. I will also point out Lord Dennings 'Red Hand rule' in that correct signage must be clearly displayed in order to notify a person may be liable for fines or any charges, Lord Denning was a Barrister and Judge of great notoriety who held any and all liable under the rule of law including government agencies and their employees, his adjudications are well worth studying in regard to common law torts and contract law as some of his rulings, judgements and precedents were most contentious especially when they found statutory bodies or agents liable for their actions or lack thereof. Considering the random actions of a certain group of vandals in and around ULEZ areas who seem to be targetting cameras and related signage one does wonder if this is evidence enough that signage may be missing or absent at any given time. Regards my residents parking PCN: fortunately for myself I had recently spent £20 on some parts for my car and I was able to claim my vehicle had broken down which was correct as my car had an intermittent fault though was still mobile. Once I sent evidence of the part I had purchased a few days before the PCN was issued I received the no fee payable notice as I had found this specific exemption listed on the local council website.
ULEZ signs do not comply with the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 and the Traffic Signs and Regulations and General Directions Act 2016. The legislation states that traffic signs must warn motorists they are entering a charging area and provide them with the times of this charge. Green and white signs marking the beginning of the ULEZ area are legally non-compliant as they do not explicitly warn drivers of the charge. The signs tell you that you are entering a ULEZ zone, but they do not tell you what the consequences are. They don’t tell you that you are going to be charged for it.
Why should you have to prove your vehicle was somewhere else and that it's been cloned? Isn't it innocent until proven guilty? It should be their job to prove 100% that it was really you surely?
Penalty charge - not a crime and certainly not a serious crime. That's one of the tricks the state has used to prevent you having your day in court. So next, they won't say where the cameras are located. It's covert filming. That comes under the RIPA [Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act] So under that act there is one group who can sign off on this. Section 32 and TFL isn't on it. It has to be for serious crimes The other is the Home Secretary, and it can only be done for serious crimes So there's no legal basis for the covert filming.
In this case, only providing a Vehicle Registration Mark would not be sufficient to establish a definite determination that a particular individual (in this case you) was the same person driving the vehicle. In addition, we could not assume the same individual was driving the same vehicle on all journeys. It would not be practical or proportionate to attempt to establish who was driving the vehicle on each occasion, and TfL’s cameras focus on the vehicle (make, model and number plate) as opposed to any occupants. Providing a more detailed level of journey data without verifying the identity of the actual driver, could mean that we enable a person to construct the movements and travel patterns of another individual and who has a reasonable expectation that the details of their journeys should remain private. ============ Just had this back from them. I want all the videos of the vehicle. Subject Access Requests are the way to really gum up the system which is why they are fighting tooth and nail over this.
THey have told me that they cannot see the driver from their photographs. So if you say its cloned, how are they going to prove otherwise? @@jaycedixon6704
_I've been challenging TfL over the last few months for the congestion charge. They alleged that I did not pay the charge within the timeframe. I made my representations, showing via my bank statement in my name showing the payment to TfL. They provided me a Notice of Rejection stating my bank statement was not sufficient evidence. So now I'm having to go through the appeals process, again making the same representations._
I was told by Essex Police that cloning a vehicle registration number is not a criminal offence and they refused to issue a crime number. They did, however, issue an 'incident' number.
They can only charge for driving on toll roads. This means the roads are privately owned. I cant remember anything in the news about TFL buying all the roads within the M25. They are owned and paid for through vehicle road tax, which means vehicle users own the road.
Drove into Edinburgh for the first time and in busy traffic, loads of tourist in the road, and I drove into a ULEZ zone. I saw a sign up on a lamp post but no idea what it was all about as I never visit other places with ULEZ in place ( small town boy) and your video has helped me decide there's no point appealing the decision. New to the area, and accidently drove into the zone with the pull of traffic. I spent plenty of tourist money in Edinburgh, wrote some good reviews for Edinburgh, loved my day and then, a week later, got SHAFTED by Edinburgh to the tune of £30. Great, easy to follow video. Cheers
He’s too busy wrecking public transport elsewhere in the country to give a stuff about the place that has the very best public transport in the country.
My friend sold her car over two years ago and she got a ulez charge for been in London and they said she had to pay. She forgot to de-register the car. Make sure you do re-register or you will get future fines
More than just a good idea . It’s a legal requirement. Also leaves you open if the vehicle is dumped or driven without valid Road Fund License. Or valid MOT etc.
But the plate has to match the car they're driving to look as under the radar as possible. I.e It's bloody stupid if you have one car and a plate of another.
I've been into ULEZ a few times recently and only charged a couple of times. So even though I've budgeted for ULEZ, I haven't spent the £. Would love to buys the guys a pint or three as a thank you for camera blocking. 👍🏻🇬🇧🍻
So the more people that clog up this ridiculous system the better... All of these PCN appeals need to be read by a person and replied to, as does the appeal system itself.... Now if only someone would come up with a bare bones appeal form that everybody could fill in, print and send...
I'm currently trying todesign an app to help people bypass ULEZ / Clean Air Zones, with live maps of camera locations, a biolerplate appeal system would be a nice addition i think...
@@kramer26 D. Milton, yep, she's the lady who said I'm too late and failed to even acknowledge any of my complaints or difficulties in trying to pay the charges.
@@iangevaux4338 how do you know it's a lady? I just assumed it's a non-person n just an arbitrary name with zero legal standing so none of these letters are actually legitimate...
My mate was talking someone to Kent, they were diverted into the ULEZ zone because of a serious accident on the road. He didn't know where this was, being from Mid Wales. Later on he got a fine. He didn't know or deliberately go into the zone. How does that stand ?
I got fined recently because of a very long stretch of roadworks that close a dual carriageway, the detour caused me to clip the edge of a ulez zone and I just got the fine through the door.
Don't know about London, but Bristol, despite being run by a hard left council with an equally far left Mayor, don't charge non-compliant vehicles for travelling through their scam zone if directed there by diversions due to surrounding roads being shut. So, if the M5 is closed and you get directed into town in a non-compliant vehicle, in theory, you won't be charged, but I strongly suspect that they'll send out the PCN and you'll have to challenge it.
@@shinkansenshinkansend8316 I wouldn't be surprised though if most drivers simply pay up rather than go through the rigmarole of trying to challenge it for fear of the fine being doubled.
It feels rather objectional that if someone else clones your vehicle that you have to provide a crime reference when you have had no involvement in the commission of that crime. Also manufacturers cheating the emissions tests is not even an issue (or is a different issue) unless TFL (or whoever) start charging the affected vehicles.
If you don’t pay and someone knocks on your door my suggestion would be to not to call them a "goon" and tell them to "do one". Stick to the advice in this video, I’ve never heard Daniel call anyone a goon. 😂
Redirection from M25- Thank you for your videos. Always very intetesting and helpful. My friend was taking family to the Luton airport from Kent. He never goes to London and had no idea how far ULEZ zone is. M25 was closed and redirection took him to ULEZ zone. It was 21st December. He received a penalty 2 weeks later. He paid, but we are trying to appeal.
Life is too short to preoccupy one's self with gathering evidence every day in the event that it might be needed. Is this what life has now been reduced to? I just boycott anywhere that's been underhanded enough to deploy ANPR etc to this kind of use (assuming that I don't just get caught out because of not knowing that a scheme is in place). That's probably what the authorities want, but if enough of us do it, the more it will hurt the city, then hopefully this will, in turn, tighten the thumbscrews. Personally, if there is insufficient and/or appropriate signage and with no adequate escape routes, I think it's entrapment. So much for that not being a valid argument though eh! Perhaps I'll stick up an ANPR camera on my drive and charge anyone who just happens to use it as a turning circle? This abusive use of ANPR technology has to stop! Strange how ANPR hasn't managed to find my neighbour's stolen car eh!
Hi Daniel, can you please explain to us why the law doesn’t assume innocent until proven guilty in the case of penalty notices, with the already accepted number clone vehicles a photograph of a number plate on a particular make of car is not proof of anything, this would be like sending a notice to all owners of red cars because one red car committed an offence. So in simple terms TFL have no proof who was the keeper or owner of a vehicle that fails to pay its charges. By all means they could write to a registered keeper asking if it was them but if the keeper says “it wasn’t me” then all further burden of proof should fall to TFL to show beyond reasonable doubt that they have identified the correct keeper by providing significant evidence ( of which a number plate is not because they are routinely cloned by the thousands). This feels like guilty unless you can convince you accuser otherwise and given that your accuser stands to gain by rejecting your claim the cards are stack against you.
I understand that in common English law 'Mens Rea' is the criteria that we are innocent until proven guilty (Mental intention...i.e intention to break the law) However, there have been exemptions written in to this.. a number of these are in connection with motoring offences. Gatso cameras take 0.8 of a second in photograph to convict:- Not much of a 'mental intention' to speed is it? nor to inadvertently drift into the pernicious ULEZ zones
I’m appealing at the moment. I had a gig in London, so had to drive to carry my instruments. I therefore set up a charging account well in advance and received confirmation it was set up. Still got a penalty notice. I sent the proof of the account set up and await decision.
Cloning would rarely take place if it wasn't for ULEZ, this happened to my brother he challenged it and won but the fact still remains ULEZ has and will be more trouble, ( in more ways than one) than it's worth.
I'm sorry, but it should be up to the PCN company to prove it was me. Not me, to prove it wasn't. Photographic evidence of the driver as well as the registration should be mandatory.
The person liable for the charge is the registered keeper not the driver. thus an image showing the numberplate is enough as it dosent matter who the driver was.
There is further grounds for a PCN to be wiped out....I put a personal number plates on my Euro 6 (petrol hybrid) car and despite this change of number plate being registered with DVLA two months ago, TFL still sent me a ULEZ PCN for £180. TFL database clearly doesn't communicate with DVLA. Left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing, despite both being Govt organisations. I complained to TFL and sent my V5 and proof of personal plate and their error was corrected. You'd think that before sending out a demand for payment TFL would get their facts straight
Well, unless you visit Birmingham and are ignorant of the existence of the scheme. And plenty of other cities have them too I subsequently found out. Fascism is here now.
One would think that 18000 instances of cloned vehicles would lead to an increase in the burden of proof requirements. A photo is no longer sufficient given that in 18000 cases it wasn't.
My partners dad had to do the proving car was cloned thing a while back. Someone with his plates were speeding up in Scotland (we live in west midlands hours away). He got a note from his boss to say he was in work he cant drive 2 things at once (he drives trucks for a living), he got a statement from family to say the car was left at home and not 3hs away in Scotland (his mate took him to work that day). He also sent insurance documents off to prove only he was able to drive it. The fine was cancelled promptly after this. We never found out who cloned the car or if the cloned plates were still in use. Informed the police ofc but yeah nothing further was said or done and the car was sold about 8 months later.
I wonder if proving your emissions are at a ULEZ complient level via emissions test and print out is also something people can use. Because a piggyback ECU and adjustment to engine fuelling and exhaust modifications. Most cars emissions can be adjusted to suitable levels.
Hi, just a short comment on emissions testing from an mot perspective. The mot test emissions test is carried out by (in the case of diesel engine vehicles)rapidly depressing the accelerator pedal to reach approximately maximum engine rpm. This would simulate something resembling normal driving i.e smoke output. This would be repeated until a maximum of 8 times or a pass, where the smoke content fell below a preset threshold, during this test no rolling road or other mechanical equipment other than the gas test equipment was used. The Cheat that was used wasn't any special or clever sensing as to test criteria, all that was done by the manufacturers was to limit the maximum rpm and the speed at which if could be reached to approximately 1500rpm while the vehicle was stationary and out of gear. This reduced any smoke output to almost zero under test but the car could be a real hazard once moving. I hope this helps your understanding. Nice work.. Tim Retired mot tester
_I'm a little saddened in this day and age we are still being limited to letters only to make representations, thus creating situations where time limits are far more difficult to adhere to._
Id also heard succesdul challenges coming from the fact that the signs for ulez zones dont have any information about how to pay/what the penalty is etc.
I agree with the comment about chasing money. You have made great videos but the recent emphasis on paid promotion/affiliate marketing is turning me off. Please reconsider the frequency of such inclusions
Simple answer don't pay deluge them in documentation and just refuse to pay it and also if you see a ulez camera you know what to do put it out of circulation
Interesting! Joining a few dots, if potentially millions (?) of vehicles are entering ULEZ but not being charged despite exceeding the emissions levels, does this not make all ULEZ charges discriminatory in nature and if so, what does this mean legally? Are TFL not in fact penalising those motorists who purchased a vehicle from an honest manufacturer? I think we need another video on this please? 😉
Daniel, love your videos but please could you do a video explaining what everyone is asking. Since when do we need to prove we are inecent in this country? I'm genuinely confused why we would be guilty until we provide proof and evidence.
What about when their own Photograph does not show the vehicle and they have miss read the number plate concerned and has been pointed out to them twice yet they won't let it go?
Why are people even paying it, right from the beginning its been stated (correctly i hope) that the ulez signs are not sufficiently clear from a legal standpoint, if thats the case then why jump through any hoops at all ?
Maybe I’m missing something, but if you register your car online for auto payment, don’t you just get a 12.50 charge if you enter the ulez area? I am sure I would do that if ever I drove my car into London. Cloning is different I agree.
Looking through history, there have been many laws - especially concerning taxation - which proved to be Bad Laws, because they were abusive, impractical, more expensive to enforce than they were worth, or simply because they have a high risk of generating public disorder. ULEZ isn't just unwelcome - it's a Bad Law. And far more to do with under-the-counter-taxation than with traffic control or the environment. And that's without a growing public concern that this is an early stage of ghettoisation - a concern I share.
Does anybody know if there is a time limit to issue the pcn? I forgot to pay dart charge I'm September. Taken tfl over 3 months to issue pcn is that acceptable?
So why are there no signs "telling" a driver that he/she will enter a ULEZ zone in say 1/2 a mile ahead giving them the opportunity to change route and avoid it?So my defense would be that.Also what if you have not got mobile data on your phone to pay it or maybe not have a mobile phone? The M6 Toll road you have to pay at kiosks and barriers.Thats a busy road but that system works.This digital age is "big brother" and its crazy.I believe alot of towns and cities are trying it now but thank god I dont drive anymore.I get the train...oh hang on they charge a kings ransom to use to travel on.We cant win.
It is also is the case that the system sometimes does not recognise a vehicle is exempt when it is using personalised number plates. Sending a copy of the original v5 and proof of the number plate purchase with your representation should sort it.
If your vehicle has an up to date MOT that means it’s passed all the emissions test and when you have paid the road tax that then entitles you to drive on all roads in the uk unless it’s a private toll road bridge or tunnel, in my eyes the London ulez zone is an illegal charge ,anyone know a good barrister willing to take on the mayor of London
Two weeks ago I drove to London. I paid the ulez fee. I now have a a fine as I drove out of the zone at 2 minutes past midnight and should have paid for two days. Can I challenge the time ? Do they need to get their timers regularly checked ? So miffed off about this !
It would be reasonable to expect them to have a record of calibration and some kind of certificate (UKAS Traceable to ISO 17025 certified - audited standards) to that effect that would prove the camera's are recording the time correctly or that they are linked to a reliable - certified Greenwich meantime signal with a measurement uncertainty that is less than 120 - 180 seconds or the time difference TFL are claiming made you liable for the fee in my opinion as a calibration and measurement engineer. Should the camera in question update the time stamp via a live link to a certified GMT timebase clock at intervals that exceed the 2-3 minutes you take issue with you may have an argument as any update interval that exceeds 3 minutes would leave room for 'reasonable doubt' in my opinion. Any and all digital devices can freeze or fail to update a time display correctly for a number of reasons, power supply variance, cold temperature, humidity, air pressure, taxi radios, solar flare radiation, mobile phone signal interference etc. I would appeal and request evidence that the time clock has a valid calibration certificate with a stated measurement uncertainty and a polling rate - update interval of less than 3 minutes, note a certificate of calibration only certifies a given device at the time of comparison to a known or given standard of 10x the accuracy of the unit under test. ie: I measure regular digital clocks to an accuracy of around 0.55 seconds with a certified stopwatch, said stopwatch is checked against a high frequency counter with an accuracy of around 5000 cycles per second and so on. Any comparison - calibration standard like my stopwatch should be listed along with serial number or other unique identifier on the certificate for the camera clock.
How does this address the Noel Wilcox case where, I believe, the signage was unlawful? I took my old but well maintained camper van on the A3 in 2019 where there was a LEZ zone. I got fined £500 (but paid £250). I've appealed recently to TfL on unlawful signage after the above case. I got the standard rejection that it is outside the 28 days.
I had to continue into London on the M1 due to an oncoming vehicle using the slip road for the M25. I challenged the fine and my reason was accepted and the charge cancelled. I was expecting a bit more of a fight over it but i found them to be great. I would never drive into London by choice because i hate the place !!!
TFL are a law unto themselves. We hired to a client a vehicle who having registered it on their operating licence and fully insured the vehicle for the period of time hired drove through a safety notice area not just one but four times. Having passed all details to TFL including the hire agreement they declined our representation and fined our company £3.860 which we are refusing to pay. Statement of liability does not exist in the TFL rule book.
@BlackBeltBarrister I know you're a barrister and know the law but you can't remember everything. You said not knowing about the charge is not an excuse. What about but Noah Wilcox case when he beat transport for London and said he didn't know about the congestion charge as the signs are completely wrong. A high court judge agreed with him and all his fines were kicked out of Court.
Can a local authority apply a tax to people it has no contractual relationship with? It does not own the highway - that belongs to the Crown, and my passport declares the monarch wishes me to pass without let or hindrance.
I have just received a ULEZ pcn. It was my vehicle but was with a garage being fixed under warranty. Who is liable for the fine, me or the garage? How do I persuade ULEZ that the vehicle was not being driven by me?
I refuse to pay the ulez fine for a few reasons 1 ulez is not legal and no signs say you have to pay. 2 i can not afford the 12.50. 3,my car passed the mot emissions test set by the government and 4 there is no proof out there that shows paying 12.50 helps clean the air
I went into the ulez area overnight for a visit to family on new years eve, left new year day. Hot home late, 1st thing in the morning on the 2nd i created an accout, setup autopay but they did not take any money. Today i got two PCN for £90 each. I did a representation. How can that be fair? Account setup with autopay in less than 48 hrs, not once did it state this would not pay for recent trips
My vehicle is Euro 4 compliant and despite having a letter issued by TFL, previously from a representation confirming indeed my vehicle is except, they then slapped more fines later claiming it is not. Even though I provided manufacturer certificate showing indeed the vehicle is Euro 4 compliant.. still fighting with TFL... Any advise appreciated, thanks
I legally drove a vehicle in London. Unfortunately i entered a box junction for 18 seconds with just my front wheels on part of the yellow lines. Video (theirs) clearly shows that the junction was NOT blocked. However, the registered owner/keeper received the charge although not having commited the "crime" HAD to pay! Can this be correct ? I reimbursed the owner for the theft (?)
Believe it or not there is a yellow box junction in Enfield town that has a gap in the middle where you can legally block the road of course if you move to unblock the road then you are in a another yellow box box so you get fined which happened to me
If tlf couldn't find 900.000 - 168.000 foreign driver details. Thats 732.000 drivers in UK that details couldn't be found. How does that work? Is it legal for details not to be found?
Hi i just received a Ulez penelty yesterday but i could not pay the £12.50 daily charge as i am in a foreign registered vehicle. They put an additional £300 on top as they cant recognise my vehicle. A motorhome of less than 3.5t . they say i must pay the full amount and contest this later ? is this correct as i can not afford this amount of money. I live full time in my moho and i do not have an address, It is a Hungarian registered vehicle. Any advise would be gratefully received. Thanks
If your vehicle passes the UK MOT emission tests you should be able to drive anywhere in the UK as your vehicle is legal .
Err, you can, you just might be charged. The standards a vehicle must meet as part of that test also vary with age.
@@beardyface8492Can you not see that the whole ULEZ and 'clean air' zones are a con period?
@@beardyface8492Gov.Uk will know if you are ULEZ compliant
Totally agree , authorities cannot keep escalating levels of legality just because it suits them , if it’s ok for the mot , it’s ok for anywhere
@@nigelfrancis2514 okay so you want them to change the standard of the MOT and make it ilegal to drive cars everywhere?
Sadly if you are a visitor from somewhere else in the country and not sure where the area starts you can wander into the area and the first thing you know about it is a £180 fine on your doormat..that is so unfair..why can't it just be the £12.50...its nothing but a legalised rip off for motorists...
Visited London a month or so ago (I'm a Northerner) and I found the whole system very confusing, apparently the vehicle I was driving was LEZ exempt - that surprised me as it was a 3l diesel engine car. I tried to pay any fees on the day (it was on expenses anyway - though I morally object to it and probably wouldn't have paid it personally) but the website was unable to process my attempt to pay.
@@matty_mcmattface Most cars and vans newer than 2016 will be exempt regardless of engine size. Euro 6c I believe, but I may be talking rubbish as I drive an EV now.
@@matty_mcmattface It's designed to be, ULEZ isn't supposed to be user friendly or in any way fair, it's designed as part of the war against motorists using the excuse of a climate fraud as justification, especially targeting poorer people.
@@st200ol That makes sense it was a 2017/18 car - but it makes no sense for emissions surely? I have the same car myself (but 2012 model) and 2l engine - so I'd have to pay for a smaller engine if I'd used my own car?
I got hit by this on my birthday last year, went to Wembley arena for a show, it was dark, i planned my route around it, there was an accident on a junction so i went around the accident missed my turn and went 200 yards down the road and turned around. Yep you guessed it, that 200 yard stretch was in ULEZ and i got hit by the full fine. I challenged it, got nowhere as i didnt deny being in it, they wouldnt let me just pay the fee, i had to pay the fine, no less…this is outrageous!
I can't imagine ULEZ lasting much longer if the Bladerunners carry on the way they're doing
It’s all making work for the working persons to do.
Bet they think all their Christmas’s have come at once.
There almost no depths Khans Council tax can be stolen, you can be sure Khans allies own the manufacturers of the equipment, its only private owners that lose from damage and theft
Sadly no, this is not the case. The Bladerunners aren't actually doing anything as you underestimate just how local and national govts waste your near unlimited taxpayer money (as you contiue to pay tax) by continuously buying new cameras, put armour on it and now pay security firms to protect it.
The REAL solution is to not pay any charges and fines, sign your logbook owner to someone else with you as a named driver and get smart with dealing with scum bailiffs. Bladerunners won't save you.
everybody dont pay simple. you pay you feed the system
it makes so much money, it will last forever.
Look at the Dartford Crossing. It was promised that fee would be collected for few years oncr the bridge had paid for itself. However, they like a revenue and continue just to increased.
In August this year my brother, from the South West, was hit with a £570 fine for driving into the ULEZ zone just before midnight and he left around 01:00. He was charged for two days for one excursion. I wrote to TfL and mentioned the Noel Wilcox tribunal and asked them to provide evidence where the charging zone started. Noel Wilcox won his appeal on the grounds the TfL ULEZ signage was not legally compliant. These were the same signs my brother passed through. We are still awaiting a response.
it's not a fine and stop appealing to the idiots who issue these notices.
the difference being - potentially - he was facing a five figure charge and ran a fleet of HGV's. I hope you succeed I really do
@@davess61 The figures are indeed different but irrespective of this, the principle still applies.
how would you deal with them@@paladin1066
The two day charge is certainly unfair for an hour and on that basis well worth appealing. If he didn't know he had entered or was forced to enter and the double charged that's insult added to injury.
I have experienced many appeals, and won most.!, the difficulty is that the council, or tfl, will treat you with contempt, will not help at all, and make things confusing. It actually requires a strong will to fight those money-grabbing *****.
Every time I have won an apeal of any PCN. I get a letter saying, in this circumstance we are willing to waive but don't you do it again you naughty boy. They never admit guilt from their side.
Angle grinders.
An aspect of such problems, and ULEZ is only the latest, can often be that the citizen's real conflict may turn out to be with the worst kind of jumped up council bureaucracy (there are better kinds, who tend to move on.)
But some so drunk with petty power, they'll take a system they know is a crock, and desperately spend endless amounts of public money rather than surrender that power.
Why does this regime put ordinary innocent citizens through all this stress? For god's sake! A scandal that will fail
What get's me is vehicle tax is based on emissions, so LEZ / ULEZ is making me pay for emissions twice.
That's why non-drivers will vote Sadiq Khan back into power next year.
Vehicle tax was SUPPOSED to be based on emissions... The Chancellor sent that lie up in flames when he decided that zero emission vehicles would be liable for tax from 2025 and retroactively applied to anything built since 2017.
@@mda5003 Nope Smartmatic will vote Khan back into power next year
as they did in 2021
Road tax is based on co2 and uzlez is based on no2.
@@Khemu-q4f But not for vehicles over 40 years old !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Before the ULEZ became as large as it is, my son was delivering a motorcycle in the LEZ which we had an account for and they tried to charge us for the ULEZ charge, but we pointed out that the direction of travel coupled with the fact that all of the signs for the ULEZ area were on our right proved that we did in fact not enter the area in question. We sent a copy of the dash cam footage and heard no more, this was 2019.
Ulez was only meant to be installed in high traffic areas.. but now they have vans driving around to catch people wherever they want.. if thats not a racket then i dont know what is councils arent allowed to use vans to fine people for speeding only police can do that yet the councils still did it.. all this ULEZ stuff is clearly a violation of every day life.
My argument is , , , my vehicle passed an MOT emissions test, therefore is legally allowed on the road. So, stuff your ulez, im not paying. 🏴
It’s the vehicle’s engine Euro rating that determines if it’s ULEZ compliant or not.
Passing or even failing an MOT makes no difference.
@davecooper3238 you mean passing an arbitrary emissions level that can be changed at a whim, technically very difficult to meet but easy to keep on increasing the standard.
@@jeffzuess9149 The London ULEZ is based around a vehicle’s Euro rating. ICE vehicles are being designed to become less polluting as the years pass.
An area’s ( city, town etc ) max pollution level is set by law. The local area are responsible to comply with the law.
Note. Euro ratings are standard worldwide.
@@davecooper3238 My vehicle is Euro 4 compliant and despite having a letter from TFL confirming this they then slapped more fines later claiming it is not. Even though I provided manufacturer certificate showing indeed the vehicle is Euro 4 compliant.. still fighting with TFL....
I recently successfully appealed a Birmingham ULEZ charge via the adjudicator. My defence was simply based on the fact that the photographic evidence merely confirmed the location of my vehicle at a certain time, but none of the photographs included any ULEZ signage, so I merely questioned what proof they had that the correct signage was in place at the time of the alleged offence and that the signage was clearly visible. The council subsequently accepted the appeal but gave no reason or explanation. I can only assume that perhaps they did not wish to set a precedent with the adjudicator on the basis that photographic proof rarely or never shows signage.
I wonder if a similar defence could be used for other offences such as speeding for example.
A very very good response you gave there and I can confirm that your assumption is very likely correct, I recently received a PCN notice from my local council for not displaying a residents parking permit, the ticket officer did take multiple photographs of signage in the area in order to prove I had been correctly notified of the need to comply with the local restrictions on parking in the area and was therefore liable. I will also point out Lord Dennings 'Red Hand rule' in that correct signage must be clearly displayed in order to notify a person may be liable for fines or any charges, Lord Denning was a Barrister and Judge of great notoriety who held any and all liable under the rule of law including government agencies and their employees, his adjudications are well worth studying in regard to common law torts and contract law as some of his rulings, judgements and precedents were most contentious especially when they found statutory bodies or agents liable for their actions or lack thereof. Considering the random actions of a certain group of vandals in and around ULEZ areas who seem to be targetting cameras and related signage one does wonder if this is evidence enough that signage may be missing or absent at any given time. Regards my residents parking PCN: fortunately for myself I had recently spent £20 on some parts for my car and I was able to claim my vehicle had broken down which was correct as my car had an intermittent fault though was still mobile. Once I sent evidence of the part I had purchased a few days before the PCN was issued I received the no fee payable notice as I had found this specific exemption listed on the local council website.
Ask them for their reasons to accept and bounce the letter on to this fellah , see what he says
I have an adjudicator meeting (online) next week, I will use this line. Thanks. Any other tips please, be very grateful.
ULEZ signs do not comply with the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 and the Traffic Signs and Regulations and General Directions Act 2016.
The legislation states that traffic signs must warn motorists they are entering a charging area and provide them with the times of this charge. Green and white signs marking the beginning of the ULEZ area are legally non-compliant as they do not explicitly warn drivers of the charge.
The signs tell you that you are entering a ULEZ zone, but they do not tell you what the consequences are. They don’t tell you that you are going to be charged for it.
Why should you have to prove your vehicle was somewhere else and that it's been cloned? Isn't it innocent until proven guilty? It should be their job to prove 100% that it was really you surely?
They have,they then send you a PCN, you have to prove to the contrary. There evidence is evidence enough.
Well they have a photo of your car in the ULEZ so that's proof, unless you can successfully undermine it.
Penalty charge - not a crime and certainly not a serious crime. That's one of the tricks the state has used to prevent you having your day in court.
So next, they won't say where the cameras are located. It's covert filming.
That comes under the RIPA [Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act]
So under that act there is one group who can sign off on this. Section 32 and TFL isn't on it. It has to be for serious crimes
The other is the Home Secretary, and it can only be done for serious crimes
So there's no legal basis for the covert filming.
In this case, only providing a Vehicle Registration Mark would not be sufficient to establish a definite determination that a particular individual (in this case you) was the same person driving the vehicle. In addition, we could not assume the same individual was driving the same vehicle on all journeys. It would not be practical or proportionate to attempt to establish who was driving the vehicle on each occasion, and TfL’s cameras focus on the vehicle (make, model and number plate) as opposed to any occupants. Providing a more detailed level of journey data without verifying the identity of the actual driver, could mean that we enable a person to construct the movements and travel patterns of another individual and who has a reasonable expectation that the details of their journeys should remain private.
============
Just had this back from them. I want all the videos of the vehicle. Subject Access Requests are the way to really gum up the system which is why they are fighting tooth and nail over this.
Is this a way around it then, I guess we could all say our car is cloned
THey have told me that they cannot see the driver from their photographs. So if you say its cloned, how are they going to prove otherwise? @@jaycedixon6704
I would rather cut the cameras down before it got to a fine.
Lol, you share the same sentiment as many others...
Cutting down cameras could bring a greater penalty.
A criminal damage conviction can lead to many problems.
@@davecooper3238When law becomes tyrannical one has a moral duty to fight it.
^^77 Brigade TROLL ALERT^^@@davecooper3238
And? the people have a right to rebel against tyranny, oppression ad fraud... it's the law...@@davecooper3238
No proper signage, no contract.
_I've been challenging TfL over the last few months for the congestion charge. They alleged that I did not pay the charge within the timeframe. I made my representations, showing via my bank statement in my name showing the payment to TfL. They provided me a Notice of Rejection stating my bank statement was not sufficient evidence. So now I'm having to go through the appeals process, again making the same representations._
I had something similar and told them you will see them in court
The statement of the money isn't enough evidence...
@@RIForg _The appeal process luckily disagrees with you, I had this overturned._
I was told by Essex Police that cloning a vehicle registration number is not a criminal offence and they refused to issue a crime number. They did, however, issue an 'incident' number.
Guilty, until you prove yourself innocent!
They can only charge for driving on toll roads. This means the roads are privately owned. I cant remember anything in the news about TFL buying all the roads within the M25. They are owned and paid for through vehicle road tax, which means vehicle users own the road.
Drove into Edinburgh for the first time and in busy traffic, loads of tourist in the road, and I drove into a ULEZ zone. I saw a sign up on a lamp post but no idea what it was all about as I never visit other places with ULEZ in place ( small town boy) and your video has helped me decide there's no point appealing the decision. New to the area, and accidently drove into the zone with the pull of traffic. I spent plenty of tourist money in Edinburgh, wrote some good reviews for Edinburgh, loved my day and then, a week later, got SHAFTED by Edinburgh to the tune of £30. Great, easy to follow video. Cheers
Why has Mark Harper not investigating this transport disaster in London. Appears to be abdicating his responsibility as transport minister !
All major parties are pushing the same treasonous agenda.
He’s too busy wrecking public transport elsewhere in the country to give a stuff about the place that has the very best public transport in the country.
The ULEZ expansion is government policy and they wanted it to be even stricter to raise more funds.
My friend sold her car over two years ago and she got a ulez charge for been in London and they said she had to pay. She forgot to de-register the car. Make sure you do re-register or you will get future fines
More than just a good idea . It’s a legal requirement. Also leaves you open if the vehicle is dumped or driven without valid Road Fund License. Or valid MOT etc.
If you are going to clone a number plate, at least pick one that is ULez compliant. Then nobody will get a fine
But the plate has to match the car they're driving to look as under the radar as possible. I.e It's bloody stupid if you have one car and a plate of another.
I've been into ULEZ a few times recently and only charged a couple of times.
So even though I've budgeted for ULEZ, I haven't spent the £.
Would love to buys the guys a pint or three as a thank you for camera blocking. 👍🏻🇬🇧🍻
So the more people that clog up this ridiculous system the better... All of these PCN appeals need to be read by a person and replied to, as does the appeal system itself.... Now if only someone would come up with a bare bones appeal form that everybody could fill in, print and send...
I'm currently trying todesign an app to help people bypass ULEZ / Clean Air Zones, with live maps of camera locations, a biolerplate appeal system would be a nice addition i think...
@@mrwpg going to be hard when you have those ULEZ vans changing position all the time.
That "person" is a certain D. Milton, according to all correspondence that makes its way out of TfL HQ.
@@kramer26 D. Milton, yep, she's the lady who said I'm too late and failed to even acknowledge any of my complaints or difficulties in trying to pay the charges.
@@iangevaux4338 how do you know it's a lady? I just assumed it's a non-person n just an arbitrary name with zero legal standing so none of these letters are actually legitimate...
My mate was talking someone to Kent, they were diverted into the ULEZ zone because of a serious accident on the road. He didn't know where this was, being from Mid Wales. Later on he got a fine. He didn't know or deliberately go into the zone. How does that stand ?
Appeal it with the dates and times of the incident. If needs be, speak to the police force in question for something in writing
You failed to mention that the signage is illegal as it doesn’t say there will be a charge
A coal fired traction engine is exempt from ULEZ as it is a historic vehicle built before 1973. Yet a 2010 diesel gets charged. Bring back steam.
“inherently criminal” …ulez.
What if there has been an accident ahead and you are diverted into the ULEZ zone?
I got fined recently because of a very long stretch of roadworks that close a dual carriageway, the detour caused me to clip the edge of a ulez zone and I just got the fine through the door.
Don't know about London, but Bristol, despite being run by a hard left council with an equally far left Mayor, don't charge non-compliant vehicles for travelling through their scam zone if directed there by diversions due to surrounding roads being shut. So, if the M5 is closed and you get directed into town in a non-compliant vehicle, in theory, you won't be charged, but I strongly suspect that they'll send out the PCN and you'll have to challenge it.
@@shinkansenshinkansend8316 I wouldn't be surprised though if most drivers simply pay up rather than go through the rigmarole of trying to challenge it for fear of the fine being doubled.
We shouldn't have to live like this
It feels rather objectional that if someone else clones your vehicle that you have to provide a crime reference when you have had no involvement in the commission of that crime.
Also manufacturers cheating the emissions tests is not even an issue (or is a different issue) unless TFL (or whoever) start charging the affected vehicles.
Can you simply call the police and ask for a crime reference number just because you think your car has been cloned or do you need to provide proof?
If you don’t pay and someone knocks on your door my suggestion would be to not to call them a "goon" and tell them to "do one". Stick to the advice in this video, I’ve never heard Daniel call anyone a goon. 😂
I also heard on TH-cam that the signage isnt right either, it doesnt state the times, and charges for different vehicles
Redirection from M25-
Thank you for your videos. Always very intetesting and helpful.
My friend was taking family to the Luton airport from Kent. He never goes to London and had no idea how far ULEZ zone is.
M25 was closed and redirection took him to ULEZ zone. It was 21st December. He received a penalty 2 weeks later.
He paid, but we are trying to appeal.
I am having the same problem
Life is too short to preoccupy one's self with gathering evidence every day in the event that it might be needed. Is this what life has now been reduced to? I just boycott anywhere that's been underhanded enough to deploy ANPR etc to this kind of use (assuming that I don't just get caught out because of not knowing that a scheme is in place). That's probably what the authorities want, but if enough of us do it, the more it will hurt the city, then hopefully this will, in turn, tighten the thumbscrews. Personally, if there is insufficient and/or appropriate signage and with no adequate escape routes, I think it's entrapment. So much for that not being a valid argument though eh! Perhaps I'll stick up an ANPR camera on my drive and charge anyone who just happens to use it as a turning circle? This abusive use of ANPR technology has to stop! Strange how ANPR hasn't managed to find my neighbour's stolen car eh!
Hi Daniel, can you please explain to us why the law doesn’t assume innocent until proven guilty in the case of penalty notices, with the already accepted number clone vehicles a photograph of a number plate on a particular make of car is not proof of anything, this would be like sending a notice to all owners of red cars because one red car committed an offence. So in simple terms TFL have no proof who was the keeper or owner of a vehicle that fails to pay its charges. By all means they could write to a registered keeper asking if it was them but if the keeper says “it wasn’t me” then all further burden of proof should fall to TFL to show beyond reasonable doubt that they have identified the correct keeper by providing significant evidence ( of which a number plate is not because they are routinely cloned by the thousands). This feels like guilty unless you can convince you accuser otherwise and given that your accuser stands to gain by rejecting your claim the cards are stack against you.
100% agree
@@martinclark1411 thank you, it’s a genuine question. Why do we have to prove innocence when they should have to prove guilt ?
I understand that in common English law 'Mens Rea' is the criteria that we are innocent until proven guilty (Mental intention...i.e intention to break the law)
However, there have been exemptions written in to this.. a number of these are in connection with motoring offences. Gatso cameras take 0.8 of a second in photograph to convict:-
Not much of a 'mental intention' to speed is it? nor to inadvertently drift into the pernicious ULEZ zones
I’m appealing at the moment. I had a gig in London, so had to drive to carry my instruments. I therefore set up a charging account well in advance and received confirmation it was set up. Still got a penalty notice. I sent the proof of the account set up and await decision.
Same for me, any news?
@@ryanhumpyy7864 Sadly I had to pay. You have to set up a second account, but that is in no way clear.
Why would you contribute to this tax is beyond me....
The government should spend more time on dealing with corrupt legal people than trying to fine the poor person for breathing.
That’s a lot of work to do for someone who has to all intents and purposes been scammed by having their vehicle cloned.
Cloning would rarely take place if it wasn't for ULEZ, this happened to my brother he challenged it and won but the fact still remains ULEZ has and will be more trouble, ( in more ways than one) than it's worth.
I'm sorry, but it should be up to the PCN company to prove it was me. Not me, to prove it wasn't. Photographic evidence of the driver as well as the registration should be mandatory.
Kinda gives the middle finger to the whole innocent till proven guilty thing.
The person liable for the charge is the registered keeper not the driver. thus an image showing the numberplate is enough as it dosent matter who the driver was.
I am aware of this but if my vehicle has been cloned, at least they have a image of the person driving.
There is further grounds for a PCN to be wiped out....I put a personal number plates on my Euro 6 (petrol hybrid) car and despite this change of number plate being registered with DVLA two months ago, TFL still sent me a ULEZ PCN for £180.
TFL database clearly doesn't communicate with DVLA. Left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing, despite both being Govt organisations.
I complained to TFL and sent my V5 and proof of personal plate and their error was corrected.
You'd think that before sending out a demand for payment TFL would get their facts straight
The best way to avoid paying ULEZ in London is to avoid London like it was Bubonic Plague…
#1 way to avoid a charge that is to avoid the giant cess pit that is London.
Well, unless you visit Birmingham and are ignorant of the existence of the scheme. And plenty of other cities have them too I subsequently found out. Fascism is here now.
One would think that 18000 instances of cloned vehicles would lead to an increase in the burden of proof requirements.
A photo is no longer sufficient given that in 18000 cases it wasn't.
My partners dad had to do the proving car was cloned thing a while back. Someone with his plates were speeding up in Scotland (we live in west midlands hours away). He got a note from his boss to say he was in work he cant drive 2 things at once (he drives trucks for a living), he got a statement from family to say the car was left at home and not 3hs away in Scotland (his mate took him to work that day). He also sent insurance documents off to prove only he was able to drive it. The fine was cancelled promptly after this. We never found out who cloned the car or if the cloned plates were still in use. Informed the police ofc but yeah nothing further was said or done and the car was sold about 8 months later.
I wonder if proving your emissions are at a ULEZ complient level via emissions test and print out is also something people can use. Because a piggyback ECU and adjustment to engine fuelling and exhaust modifications. Most cars emissions can be adjusted to suitable levels.
Hi, just a short comment on emissions testing from an mot perspective. The mot test emissions test is carried out by (in the case of diesel engine vehicles)rapidly depressing the accelerator pedal to reach approximately maximum engine rpm. This would simulate something resembling normal driving i.e smoke output. This would be repeated until a maximum of 8 times or a pass, where the smoke content fell below a preset threshold, during this test no rolling road or other mechanical equipment other than the gas test equipment was used.
The Cheat that was used wasn't any special or clever sensing as to test criteria, all that was done by the manufacturers was to limit the maximum rpm and the speed at which if could be reached to approximately 1500rpm while the vehicle was stationary and out of gear. This reduced any smoke output to almost zero under test but the car could be a real hazard once moving. I hope this helps your understanding.
Nice work..
Tim
Retired mot tester
_I'm a little saddened in this day and age we are still being limited to letters only to make representations, thus creating situations where time limits are far more difficult to adhere to._
My car spends 4 days per week in my garage, with me at home..how could i prove my car didnt go through a ulez camera, if it was cloned ???????
Has the high court not ruled ULEZ unlawful due to the signs not informing charges apply?
Id also heard succesdul challenges coming from the fact that the signs for ulez zones dont have any information about how to pay/what the penalty is etc.
Just change the registered keeper to Mr sad IQ Kant, city hall London and get him to pay it, all the fines will go to him
How do you prove a negative?
How do you prove it was NOT there unless you CAN prove it was elsewhere?
I agree with the comment about chasing money. You have made great videos but the recent emphasis on paid promotion/affiliate marketing is turning me off. Please reconsider the frequency of such inclusions
Simple answer don't pay deluge them in documentation and just refuse to pay it and also if you see a ulez camera you know what to do put it out of circulation
Interesting! Joining a few dots, if potentially millions (?) of vehicles are entering ULEZ but not being charged despite exceeding the emissions levels, does this not make all ULEZ charges discriminatory in nature and if so, what does this mean legally? Are TFL not in fact penalising those motorists who purchased a vehicle from an honest manufacturer? I think we need another video on this please? 😉
That's not what discrimination is...
Which cars are are not being charged ? ?
@@tttt4029 any that haven't been fixed by the manufacturer and are still defective meaning they're incorrectly categorised for ULEZ purposes?
Anythings possible I guess, would just be nice to get some money back for the current emissions scandal.
Daniel, love your videos but please could you do a video explaining what everyone is asking. Since when do we need to prove we are inecent in this country? I'm genuinely confused why we would be guilty until we provide proof and evidence.
What about when their own Photograph does not show the vehicle and they have miss read the number plate concerned and has been pointed out to them twice yet they won't let it go?
They let mine go and all i said was the vehicle is not registered to my account but that was a charge not a pcn
Why are people even paying it, right from the beginning its been stated (correctly i hope) that the ulez signs are not sufficiently clear from a legal standpoint, if thats the case then why jump through any hoops at all ?
Maybe I’m missing something, but if you register your car online for auto payment, don’t you just get a 12.50 charge if you enter the ulez area? I am sure I would do that if ever I drove my car into London. Cloning is different I agree.
Yes but please check your statement as i was charged for a vehicle which was a letter wrong on the reg no
Looking through history, there have been many laws - especially concerning taxation - which proved to be Bad Laws, because they were abusive, impractical, more expensive to enforce than they were worth, or simply because they have a high risk of generating public disorder.
ULEZ isn't just unwelcome - it's a Bad Law. And far more to do with under-the-counter-taxation than with traffic control or the environment.
And that's without a growing public concern that this is an early stage of ghettoisation - a concern I share.
It's not even a law.
Does anybody know if there is a time limit to issue the pcn? I forgot to pay dart charge I'm September. Taken tfl over 3 months to issue pcn is that acceptable?
Not knowing you had to pay a charge IS a grounds for appeal since the signage does not state any charge payable.
So why are there no signs "telling" a driver that he/she will enter a ULEZ zone in say 1/2 a mile ahead giving them the opportunity to change route and avoid it?So my defense would be that.Also what if you have not got mobile data on your phone to pay it or maybe not have a mobile phone? The M6 Toll road you have to pay at kiosks and barriers.Thats a busy road but that system works.This digital age is "big brother" and its crazy.I believe alot of towns and cities are trying it now but thank god I dont drive anymore.I get the train...oh hang on they charge a kings ransom to use to travel on.We cant win.
It is also is the case that the system sometimes does not recognise a vehicle is exempt when it is using personalised number plates. Sending a copy of the original v5 and proof of the number plate purchase with your representation should sort it.
QUESTION, suing the manufacturers does this not have a knock on effect of said manufacturers raising their prices to recover the sued amount???
A guide to challenging, and a good one; - not a guide to defeating as title suggests.
If your vehicle has an up to date MOT that means it’s passed all the emissions test and when you have paid the road tax that then entitles you to drive on all roads in the uk unless it’s a private toll road bridge or tunnel, in my eyes the London ulez zone is an illegal charge ,anyone know a good barrister willing to take on the mayor of London
What happened to innocent till proven guilty?
Two weeks ago I drove to London. I paid the ulez fee. I now have a a fine as I drove out of the zone at 2 minutes past midnight and should have paid for two days. Can I challenge the time ? Do they need to get their timers regularly checked ? So miffed off about this !
It would be reasonable to expect them to have a record of calibration and some kind of certificate (UKAS Traceable to ISO 17025 certified - audited standards) to that effect that would prove the camera's are recording the time correctly or that they are linked to a reliable - certified Greenwich meantime signal with a measurement uncertainty that is less than 120 - 180 seconds or the time difference TFL are claiming made you liable for the fee in my opinion as a calibration and measurement engineer. Should the camera in question update the time stamp via a live link to a certified GMT timebase clock at intervals that exceed the 2-3 minutes you take issue with you may have an argument as any update interval that exceeds 3 minutes would leave room for 'reasonable doubt' in my opinion. Any and all digital devices can freeze or fail to update a time display correctly for a number of reasons, power supply variance, cold temperature, humidity, air pressure, taxi radios, solar flare radiation, mobile phone signal interference etc. I would appeal and request evidence that the time clock has a valid calibration certificate with a stated measurement uncertainty and a polling rate - update interval of less than 3 minutes, note a certificate of calibration only certifies a given device at the time of comparison to a known or given standard of 10x the accuracy of the unit under test. ie: I measure regular digital clocks to an accuracy of around 0.55 seconds with a certified stopwatch, said stopwatch is checked against a high frequency counter with an accuracy of around 5000 cycles per second and so on. Any comparison - calibration standard like my stopwatch should be listed along with serial number or other unique identifier on the certificate for the camera clock.
just remember this charge is to make you not want to drive there plan is for you to own nothing and be happy WEF
How does this address the Noel Wilcox case where, I believe, the signage was unlawful?
I took my old but well maintained camper van on the A3 in 2019 where there was a LEZ zone. I got fined £500 (but paid £250).
I've appealed recently to TfL on unlawful signage after the above case.
I got the standard rejection that it is outside the 28 days.
Am I correct in saying that the emissions claims are only against diesel cars?
I had to continue into London on the M1 due to an oncoming vehicle using the slip road for the M25. I challenged the fine and my reason was accepted and the charge cancelled. I was expecting a bit more of a fight over it but i found them to be great. I would never drive into London by choice because i hate the place !!!
Surely, the case of N.Hamilton (speeding offence, failure to notify driver) sets the legal president, and can be used.
If not? Why not?
TFL are a law unto themselves. We hired to a client a vehicle who having registered it on their operating licence and fully insured the vehicle for the period of time hired drove through a safety notice area not just one but four times. Having passed all details to TFL including the hire agreement they declined our representation and fined our company £3.860 which we are refusing to pay. Statement of liability does not exist in the TFL rule book.
And what happens when you tried to pay after your appeal but the council refuse to accept
@BlackBeltBarrister I know you're a barrister and know the law but you can't remember everything. You said not knowing about the charge is not an excuse. What about but Noah Wilcox case when he beat transport for London and said he didn't know about the congestion charge as the signs are completely wrong. A high court judge agreed with him and all his fines were kicked out of Court.
Can a local authority apply a tax to people it has no contractual relationship with?
It does not own the highway - that belongs to the Crown, and my passport declares the monarch wishes me to pass without let or hindrance.
Could you please give me information about how I can make a none disclosure agreement? I would very much apricate your input. Big fan.
Always demand a trial by jury
I thought your innocent till PROVEN guilty !?!?!?
In a court of law ... and tou need to provide evidence for your argument. Plus a penalty charge isn't a fine.
The registered keeper is responsible for the vehicle.
Worth remembering if you loan a vehicle out.
I have just received a ULEZ pcn. It was my vehicle but was with a garage being fixed under warranty. Who is liable for the fine, me or the garage? How do I persuade ULEZ that the vehicle was not being driven by me?
The garage. Send all written proof in on appeal.
I find your channel very informative hope you’re well
What happened to mo harm? No loss!
I refuse to pay the ulez fine for a few reasons 1 ulez is not legal and no signs say you have to pay. 2 i can not afford the 12.50. 3,my car passed the mot emissions test set by the government and 4 there is no proof out there that shows paying 12.50 helps clean the air
I went into the ulez area overnight for a visit to family on new years eve, left new year day. Hot home late, 1st thing in the morning on the 2nd i created an accout, setup autopay but they did not take any money. Today i got two PCN for £90 each. I did a representation. How can that be fair? Account setup with autopay in less than 48 hrs, not once did it state this would not pay for recent trips
My vehicle is Euro 4 compliant and despite having a letter issued by TFL, previously from a representation confirming indeed my vehicle is except, they then slapped more fines later claiming it is not. Even though I provided manufacturer certificate showing indeed the vehicle is Euro 4 compliant.. still fighting with TFL... Any advise appreciated, thanks
Could you do one about the bat boxes please
I legally drove a vehicle in London. Unfortunately i entered a box junction for 18 seconds with just my front wheels on part of the yellow lines. Video (theirs) clearly shows that the junction was NOT blocked. However, the registered owner/keeper received the charge although not having commited the "crime" HAD to pay! Can this be correct ? I reimbursed the owner for the theft (?)
Believe it or not there is a yellow box junction in Enfield town that has a gap in the middle where you can legally block the road of course if you move to unblock the road then you are in a another yellow box box so you get fined which happened to me
What do you do if ulez say a bank statement is not proof of payment.
I have a pre-2008 diesel- any chance for me (as before 2008)?
Same. I'm currently challenging mine due to a few impact factors and technicalities. It's now at adjudication stage. The khanage continues...
Thank you, Alan. Very useful.
If tlf couldn't find 900.000 - 168.000 foreign driver details.
Thats 732.000 drivers in UK that details couldn't be found.
How does that work? Is it legal for details not to be found?
Always post documents using a tracking service that proves delivery and receipt
A better solution is no one pay it at all.
They can charge the manufacturer for the misleading emissions.
It’s unacceptable.
What happened to presumed innocent till proven guilty?
Hi i just received a Ulez penelty yesterday but i could not pay the £12.50 daily charge as i am in a foreign registered vehicle. They put an additional £300 on top as they cant recognise my vehicle. A motorhome of less than 3.5t . they say i must pay the full amount and contest this later ? is this correct as i can not afford this amount of money. I live full time in my moho and i do not have an address, It is a Hungarian registered vehicle. Any advise would be gratefully received. Thanks
My argument is that the ULEZ sign doesn't imply a charge at all - how is anyone supposed to know this unless you've heard of ULEZ before?