Author Topic: TfL rejecting representation, despite overwhelming evidence  (Read 405 times)

0 Members and 30 Guests are viewing this topic.

Not sure how to attach a photo on mobile, so I will paste below what the latest letter says:

‘In your representation you have stated you purchased the vehicle through Facebook Marketplace on 15/02/2026 at approximately 15:25. You have timestamped Facebook messages from the seller showing arrangements for the purchase and confirming the seller was driving the vehicle to deliver it to you. Your bank statement also shows the payment to the previous owner at 15:25. You have a DVLA New Keeper Confirmation email received at 16:19 and a DVLA tax confirmation email received at 16:24, both issued after the stated ULEZ contravention time. You only know the previous keeper's name, [redacted] and confirm that he delivered the vehicle to you at around 14:30 on 15/02/2026, several hours after the contravention at 10:58. You have supplied all available evidence, including Facebook messages with the seller, bank transaction proof showing the vehicle was paid for after the contravention, and DVLA emails confirming the keeper change and payment times. You have attached all supporting documents.
Although we acknowledge the points raised and evidence provided in your representation, in this instance we have decided not to exercise our discretion as we do not consider the mitigation factors present to have given reason to cancel the PCN.
This is because you have failed to provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate the vehicle was bought after to the date of contravention.
As the registered keeper of the vehicle it is your duty to make yourself aware of any charges, tolls or other restrictions that may be in existence along your route. We have made full information regarding the Ultra Low Emission Zone, including its boundary, operating hours and payment options, available through our Contact Centre and online at tfl.gov.uk/ulez, as well as running a public information campaign.’

So as the letter says I bought a car and the same day that I bought it, the seller drove through ULEZ and received up a ULEZ fine. I have multiple different pieces of evidence stating that I bought the car after the time that the fine was received however TFL are not budging on their stance.

I’ve given them every bit of evidence I have proving that I was not the keeper of the vehicle at the time, however they are refusing to accept my representations.

Since the seller delivered the vehicle to my house, I only have his name, not his address, which I have provided, to no avail.

What else can I possibly give them?

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


Re: TfL rejecting representation, despite overwhelming evidence
« Reply #1 on: »
All you can now do, if TfL are obdurate, is to register an appeal at London Tribunals. The test here is the civil law "on the balance of probabilities". You have presented TfL with evidence that they call "mitigation"; what tosh !!
So I think you have quite a strong case, but of course must risk the full PCN penalty, not the discount.


Re: TfL rejecting representation, despite overwhelming evidence
« Reply #2 on: »
Can I try and simplify this.

The person liable is the 'keeper' (registered keeper for this purpose at the moment) at the time of the contravention. So, are you saying that both the seller and you were registered as keepers on the same day and that the issue is at what time they ceased to be keeper and you became the RK and how this change is recorded by DVLA?

Ownership in the normal sense is not relevant so I would leave this to one side for the moment. TfL only act on the basis of info provided by DVLA.

is the sellers address not on the V5 (log book) ??
Quote from: andy_foster
Mick, you are a very, very bad man

is the sellers address not on the V5 (log book) ??

Not any more...data protection!

is the sellers address not on the V5 (log book) ??

Not any more...data protection!
pretty sure youll find the RK's Name and Address are on the front of the V5.
ill hazard a guess the OP didnt bother to check the V5 details (and clearly didnt record them) in order to ascertain the seller was even the Registered Keeper.
Quote from: andy_foster
Mick, you are a very, very bad man

Talking at cross purposes maybe - the V5C has the current keeper's details on it, but not the former keeper's details  - well it didn't in mid 2018: my Wife's car, bought in Feb '18 gives the previous keeper's details, but mine, bought in Jun '18 merely gives the number of former keepers - and the box where previous keeper details was talks about data protection.  Unlikely this has reverted since...  If you had the whole original V5C you would have the former keeper's details on it, but the seller is only supposed to pass on the new keeper part (which doesn't).

Definitely at cross purposes IMO!

As the PCN was sent to the OP, the current owner(RK) is the OP and the previous owner was(presumably) the seller whose details the OP would have and which they need to use when relying upon the grounds of 'I was not the owner at the time'.

We need to hear from the OP.

The first post rather obscures the key facts IMO:

Contravention: 10.58
Vehicle delivered at OP's address: 14.30
Payment for car: 15.25
DVLA confirmation of OP as RK: 16.19
The previous owner relinquished possession to the OP at 15.25 until which time the 'keeper' (who is the person by whom the car was kept) was IMO the seller.

And yet DVLA gave the authority the OP's details. I suggest the OP gets on to DVLA.