Free Traffic Legal Advice

Both the locations you've gives us links to are well within the zone. Honestly if you saw a sign saying you were within the zone, it would have been best to just pay the £12.50, but we are where we are.

You need to go to https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/ultra-low-emission-zone/ulez-where-and-when and compare your route to the ULEZ boundary in order to work out exactly where you would have entered the zone.

Hm. I think I'd have paid up the £12.50.  Gambling you'll win a PCN case where the discount alone is £90, full penalty £180 on a possible inadequate signage appeal is taking a big risk IMHO.

Well if it was just a question of hedging my bets I probably would have done, but I strongly object to paying this stealth tax and will do anything I need to do to avoid supporting it

I'm not sure paying £180 is better than paying £12.50 whether you support the scheme or not. Of course you could just ignore all the correspondence, but eventually that will end up with bailiffs at your door and a bill of over £500, of which £270 would go straight to TFL.

Anyway, as google street view is not up to date with the new signs installed since the latest ULEZ expansion, the only way to assess the adequacy of the signage would be for you to go back and get some photos.

Don't confuse the London Low Emission Zone, (LEZ),  with the London Ultra Low Emission Zone, (ULEZ),  the two are different.
https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/low-emission-zone.
and
https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/ultra-low-emission-zone

I've just seen this on a social media site as an example text for an appeal based upon signage

Anyone care to comment?

"Your ULEZ signage was not clear and visible enough. The signage failed to display charge information, thereby contravening the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 (TSRGD). Schedule 10 of the TSRGD defines and outlines the requirements for these signs, emphasizing the need for clear and visible display of the charge amount, applicable time periods, and any exemptions. This was not adhered to, and your request for payment is consequently unlawful.

The legislation that outlines the requirements for "Charge Information Signs" for Low Emission Zones (LEZs) is found in the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 (TSRGD). Specifically, Schedule 10 of the TSRGD provides detailed specifications for traffic signs related to LEZs, including charge information signs.  Schedule 10 of the TSRGD defines a "charge information sign" as a sign that indicates the amount of the charge payable for entering an LEZ. The sign must be displayed in a prominent position and be easily visible to drivers. The sign must also include the following information:

The amount of the charge
The applicable time periods for the charge
Any exemptions from the charge

The TSRGD also specifies the design and layout of charge information signs. The sign must be rectangular in shape and have a white background with black lettering. The lettering must be of a size that is easily readable from a distance.  Local authorities have some discretion in the design of charge information signs, but they must ensure that the signs comply with the general requirements of the TSRGD.

In August 2023, Hertfordshire scaffolder Noel Willcox won a legal battle against your so-called "organization" over the signage for London's Low Emission Zone (LEZ). Here is a summary of the key points of the case:

Willcox was fined £11,500 for driving his company truck in and out of its depot in Harefield, North West London. Willcox argued that the LEZ signs were not clear or visible enough, and that he had not been aware that he was entering the zone.  The tribunal ruled in Willcox's favour, saying that the LEZ signs were not "authorised and lawful". The ruling may have implications for the signage for the ULEZ, and for other drivers who have been fined for entering the LEZ.

On the basis that there is no difference between that case and this, we reject your request for payment."

I'll take a picture and send that off with my representations

Will keep you posted

I've just seen this on a social media site as an example text for an appeal based upon signage

Anyone care to comment?

Noel Wilcox was never 'fined' at all; he accrued penalties of £7,000, not the often quoted £11,500.

He didn't 'win' his case, TfL LOST it by not providing the evidence the adjudicator asked for.

It was a one-off because they have that evidence and have presented it in numerous subsequent adjudications: That is, that TfL have special authorisation for the signs, from DfT, that overrides the TSRGD requirements.