Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) => Topic started by: ZYX on August 16, 2024, 10:15:06 am
-
Tried to upload a longer answer but this website wouldn't permit it.
Have now started on a paper complaint using the fact they already admitted the June charge was wrongly applied.
I assume you mean you were trying to upload some documents or images. There is limited storage space on the forum so you need to host documents and images elsewhere and include the links to them in your posts on here.
The instructions are to be found in the READ THIS FIRST - **BEFORE POSTING YOUR CASE!** (https://www.ftla.uk/civil-penalty-charge-notices-(councils-tfl-and-so-on)/read-this-first-before-posting-your-case!-this-section-is-for-council-tfl-dartme/) sticky post at the top of page 1 of the forum.
-
Tried to upload a longer answer but this website wouldn't permit it.
Have now started on a paper complaint using the fact they already admitted the June charge was wrongly applied.
-
The below comes from a recent FOI request to TFL (https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/transparency/freedom-of-information/foi-request-detail?referenceId=FOI-4522-2324#:~:text=Disputes%20about%20individual%20charges%20can,before%20any%20payment%20is%20taken.) and seems to be relevant to your case.
"Drivers can view their AutoPay accounts at any time throughout the month to check which charges are being assigned to the account, and to view the images associated with each individual charge. Disputes about individual charges can be raised as soon as the charge appears on the account, and at any time up to 60 days from the date of the statement. AutoPay account holders therefore have multiple opportunities to view and, if necessary, dispute charges before any payment is taken."
So you should be still within the 60 day window to raise a dispute for the June charge. But you'll probably have a bit of a fight to dispute the February charge. You probably should have raised the dispute even if the photo was missing. Is there not a way to dispute by post if online doesn't work? After all your position is that the car was off the road, SORN on private property and hadn't been moved at all since December 2023. So it's not really your problem to investigate why the charge was raised. That was a job for TFL. All you know is that no charge was due.
Be polite but insist that they allow you to dispute the February charge and I would hope that they'll cave in. In the interests of justice and so on.
I don't believe that's there any other way to proceed other than to follow their disputed charge procedures.
-
We left the Autopay system to "do it's thing" and have had several charges for one of the other non compliant cars, then fairly recently we noticed that the car SORNed had been charged TWICE for ULEZ, £25 total. 21 June 2024 and 17 Feb 2024. It has never left the driveway since December 2023.
'Fairly recently'? I thought autopay produced a monthly account statement. There is some responsibility which falls to the account holder to bring matters to TfL's attention in a timely fashion.
Anyway, you claim that TfL have made 2 unauthorised deductions from your account, one in Feb. 2024 the other in June.
What have you done? Can we see any correspondence pl.
-
That's interesting - I didn't know you could access pics unless you got a PCN.
I guess all you can do is try and escalate the complaint which should be made much easier by the June misread.
The best way to avoid this is to take cars off autopay and deal with PCNs instead through the statutory process.
-
Signed our cars up for Autopay on TfL ULEZ site last year when it all started in our area. In December 2023 the MOT on one of the cars listed expired and so we removed the battery on it, declared SORN for it, and parked it on the driveway under covers. Mistakenly we thought that since it did not move there would be no ULEZ charges, and we trusted TfL to be honest and accurate about this! ;D
We left the Autopay system to "do it's thing" and have had several charges for one of the other non compliant cars, then fairly recently we noticed that the car SORNed had been charged TWICE for ULEZ, £25 total. 21 June 2024 and 17 Feb 2024. It has never left the driveway since December 2023.
JUNE 2024
After trying for far too long we found our way to the hidden arrow button to reveal the TfL "evidence" photographs for the June occasion. Many attempts to get the photographs to show, and claimed "Something went wrong" TfL website statements, and we finally got the June pictures to appear.
4 pictures of their evidence for this charge show a photograph of a totally different model / colour / make of car with an incomplete numberplate "A123 AB?" showing. ? being the last letter of the plate which was half obscured by another car roof.
Picture 5 shows this different model / colour / make of car, a complete numberplate picture with all letters visible "A123 ABC"...and ironically in the top left corner of the photograph they quote the numberplate of our SORNed car "A123 ABD" as the item generating the charge. Cross checking evidence you supply is a wonderful thing!
We have contested this charge, and TBH they would really have to be stupid to refuse issuing a refund given the Photograph 5 evidence they supplied as the reason for the charge. Ironically the other different car is compliant ! I have screenshot the evidence photographs in case we cannot access them again.
FEBRUARY 2024
We have never been able to access the evidence photographs for this charging occasion, constant website "Something went wrong" messages. If you cannot access the photographs then you cannot hit the button to demand an investigation as to why the charge being generated on a SORNed car. Odd that it is OK to generate a charge based on inaccurate evidence, then conveniently delete this evidence without us ever being able to access it.
Obviously if TfL admit the June charge was incorrectly applied and refund, then there is also some leverage against the Feb one and the possibility that the charge was also wrongly applied then too - especially since the car was SORN and undriveable at the time.
Today we received a letter saying that the June charge is under investigation, but TfL delete photographs after 90 days and (since we did not access the February photographs before 17 May 2024) they have been deleted - as per the "User Agreement".
Any ideas on a way forward appreciated. I guess that the answer regarding June is a pivotal point?