Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Mistaken congestion charge penalty
Back in December we received a penalty charge notice for non payment of the congestion charge saying that our car had been snapped in the Borough Road some days earlier. The driver told me this was impossible as the car had not been south of the Thames that day.
Looking at TFL's online record of evidence showed photos bearing an identifying tag giving the number of a "transportable ULEZ camera". The car looked like ours but the street seemed so unlike the Borough Road that I suspected some kind of mistake had been made.
According to TFL maps, the Borough Road is wide with both parking and cycle lanes on each side. Google street view shows the cycle lanes as green. On this basis, I repudiated the PCN. TFL asked for more evidence, eg had there been other such incidents, had I reported the registration plate as cloned etc. I said there had been no other such occurence and that their photograph was not a sufficient basis for troubling the police or anyone else.
TFL then asked for a sworn affidavit that the car had not been in the congestion charge zone. I replied that I was not willing to go the expense and inconvenience of doing this (during the lockdown when apparently even courts were not insisting on these) but if TFL would produce an affidavit asserting that our car was in the Borough Road, I would certainly respond in kind and also ask the police to investigate the veracity of their statement.
TFL maintained their position without responding to my repeated insistence that their transportable camera had not been where they claimed. This left me the choice of paying up or appealing to the adjudicator. I appealed saying that TFL had obviously mishandled the data and couldn't (or wouldn't) say where their camera had been.
One week before the date fixed for the hearing TFL dropped the case.
What are lessons? One of them is that we should give thanks for the existence of the European Convention of Human Rights which requires that where fines can be imposed by administrative officials there must be a means of appeal to an independent tribunal. We owe the existence of adjudicators to this international treaty provision. It doesn't prevent officials being obstinate or inefficient but it does mean they must be able to explain themselves. Another lesson is the sheer slog of having to deal with such cases probably leads officals to hope that their mistakes will not be challenged. I wonder whether our politicians keep track of how often this kind of thing happens. Backing down at the last moment is, in my view, a form of abuse that should be sanctioned if it becomes a habit.
Sadiq Khan is the ex-officio head of TFL, so he's the man to ask!
Tags for Forum Posts: appeals, congestion charge
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Sixfaces on
-
I had my car cloned - numberplate but also attached to a car that looked so identical to mine in the photos and videos provided that I started wondering whether I had maybe been to Hackney on the day in question. Eventually realised it was a very slightly different model (exact same colour though), from the colour of the boot handle trim and positioning of brake lights. Was very strange! Only had the one PCN - don't know if the (other) car was caught.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
Borough Road? What a coincidence!
In January blogger "Mr Mustard" had an example of a similar "genuine mistake" by TfL. (Of course nobody would ever suggest any other explanation.)
https://lbbspending.blogspot.com/2021/01/tfl-south-of-river-no-chan...
Do "our politicians keep track of how often this kind of thing happens?"
Some do. But I've no idea how few or how many. Some - it seems to me - have probably lacked a moral compass from the start of their political activity. Others used to have one, but it gradually faltered.
I do understand how and why this can happen. Yes, even to decent people who mostly try to do the right thing.
Also to be clear about Mr Mustard, he has no problem with parking rules as such. Nor with regulations and fines aimed at reducing air pollution. But he's also rightly keen on the the powerful being bound by the letter of the regulations and rules applying to the rest of us.
-
Permalink Reply by Dick Harris on
-
Thank you Alan for putting up this case. It is clearly about exactly the same error and it is therefore even more vexing that TFL did not drop our case immediately rather than continue sending their stream of ludicrous computerised letters from "D Milton" whose postal address is a PO Box in Darlington. I wonder whether FoI would yield the number of cases from the Borough Road that were challenged but paid without an appeal.
-
-
Dick Harris,
Do please send Mr Mustard (Derek Dishman) an email.
He has a solid reputation with several Parking Services and - probably more effective - with some of the adjudicators.
They seem to respect the fact that he knows his stuff and isn't wasting their time.
But your general point is correct that TfL and the boroughs should be learning from errors and improving their systems and case handling. But apparently they don't seem to learn. Which would confirm a speculation that they are relying on car owners simply paying-up.
In other words that the PCN system has, at least partially, become a money raising scam instead of a means of regulating behaviour.
-
-
Not to let any body off the hook, but TfL do not administer the Congestion Charge in-house.
The contract for this is in the hands of the outsourcing specialists Capita [Private Eye always inserts a strategic 'r' for satiric effect]. The contract was recently renewed for another five years, which might affect attitudes to TfL.
-
-
Hmm.
In Mr Mustard's posted documentation the correspondence appears to be with TfL.
-
-
Yes, but the data processing/identification information is done by the back office and supplied to TfL. GIGO, I say.
-
-
It's worth noting that public sector bodies remain accountable for services they outsource regardless of what they might suggest.
-
-
Stav Aristides -
There are exceptions. Any notion that Haringey's current ruling regime is "accountable" for anything appears mostly fictional. In my opinion its anonymous "spokespeople" frequently stray from fiction into fantasy. Take for example the article by Simon Allin in the Enfield Independent on 8 April 2021.
Trigger Warning
People with high blood pressure may wish to avoid this link. Similarly anyone who wets themselves laughing at ridiculous bureaucratic contortions to avoid truth.
https://www.enfieldindependent.co.uk/news/19219054.haringey-labour-...
-
Permalink Reply by Bob Ruggles on
-
As with most Labour Controlled Authorities. They Out source Local Authority Services
So much for a policy of running Public Services, for the people by the people
Biggest Joke with out sourcing Local Authority Services. That in most cases it does No save Rate / Tax payers any Funds. Plus looses work for locals
-
Permalink Reply by adamvietnam on
-
Is it just Labour controlled authorities that do this?
What happens with Conservative ones?
-
-
All councils outsource services, sigh (not you, Adam).
Barnet Council (Conservative) was a very early adopter of maximum outsourcing back in the white heat of 2012. By 2019 services were so parlous that some were taken away from Capita (see above) and back inhouse.
I think also that Northamptonshire County Council (ditto) was also poorly served by outsourcing to the extent that it failed financially and has just been abolished.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
