I will PM you a link to put in the representation, it will redirect to https://imgur.com/a/OjHJMDZ but if you give them the link I'll PM you, we can use the click count to confirm whether they've looked at it or not (obviously do not click on that link yourself as we want the click count to remain at zero). If they don't click on it, we can then prove they've failed to consider all of the evidence. If they say in the rejection that they've considered all the evidence, we've got them for lying as well.
Dear Transport for London,
This penalty charge notice has been cancelled, I refer you to the screenshot at (replace with link I will PM you) showing the outstanding amount as £0. In the circumstances, I do not believe you are entitled to reinstate the penalty.
Furthermore, I do not accept that on this occasion you used an approved device, and if you wish to pursue this matter further you will be put to proof on this point.
Yours faithfully,
Send the representation via the tfl website and keep a screenshot of the confirmation page.
Separately to this, write back to foi@tfl.gov.uk as follows:
Dear Transport for London,
I hereby request an internal review of EIR response 3162-2324.
The starting point is that I have no knowledge of, nor any interest in, any other requests made by other persons. I have made this request solely because I am in receipt of a penalty charge notice that purports to be issued on the basis of a record produced by an approved device, and I wish to confirm whether the device in question is in fact approved. If other persons have made other requests, the merits of those requests and whether they were reasonably made or not has nothing to do with me and has no bearing on my interest in obtaining this information for my own purposes, so I do not accept that my request could be manifestly unreasonable.
Furthermore, the make and model of a camera would not, on its own, result in the camera being identified as a ULEZ camera. If the make and model of every single camera in London were published online, this would not have any impact on the identification of ULEZ cameras (as long as you do not confirm which makes and models of cameras are used solely for the purposes of ULEZ). In any event anyone wanting to know the location of any ULEZ cameras can simply have a look at any of the many maps published online such as http://info.grok.co.uk/ulez/ or https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/viewer?mid=1DauY884SZfYUj0C2hVA-br1Mgn64lmQ&ll=51.48976696101502%2C-0.08814999999999795&z=10 which are updated on an almost daily basis.
I now require TFL to carry out an internal review in light of the above. In the alternative, if TFL is willing to cancel PCN GX09494256 then I am happy to withdraw my information request.
Yours faithfully,
Call TFL first thing on Monday and ask for the video, the number is 0343 222 3333. They will send a DVD in the post and put the penalty on hold while you wait.
Also send this to foi@tfl.gov.uk:
Dear Transport for London,
There is a CCTV camera outside 74b Stamford Hill, London, N16 6XS, which is visible here: https://maps.app.goo.gl/wxfZBYiGhGwckp4n7
I would like to know the make and model of this camera.
I would also like copies of any documentation confirming the make and model of the camera.
Yours faithfully,
If there is anything you can put to TFL in mitigation, please tell us now as we'd want to cover that in the representations.
Lastly it might be an idea to go and check if this sign is still there: https://maps.app.goo.gl/4PG8HaNkaetT94hd9