A successful legal challenge, posed by a scaffolder, has thrown London Mayor Sadiq Khan’s Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) scheme into potential turmoil, with a recent victory over its sister scheme, that questioned the legality of associated signage.
The victory, delivered in a tribunal judgement on October 13, 2021, has raised questions about the application of fines within the ULEZ expansion.
During the summer preceding the judgement, Noel Willcox’s company accrued fines totalling an astounding £11,500 for commuting from a depot in Harefield, North West London.
The fines were issued in relation to London’s former Low Emission Zone (LEZ), which levied penalties of up to £300 per day for drivers of “heavily polluting” vehicles operating within the designated zone.
It has now been replaced largely by the rollout of the new ULEZ expansion zone, which came into effect yesterday.
Mr. Willcox, who was determined to challenge the fines from the off, recounted his experience to The Epoch Times in an interview, saying: “We had no idea what these fines were … It kept saying lower emissions. And we were like, what is a low emission zone?”
Related Stories
His challenge led him to the tribunal, where he disputed the legitimacy of signage erected by Transport for London (TfL) for the LEZ.
‘It’s Not Down to the Driver’
In his defence, Mr. Willcox argued that the onus shouldn’t solely be on the driver to determine charging zones, stating, “The law doesn’t say that. It’s not down to the driver … So what they’re saying is, no matter what vehicle you drive, you have to make sure that you check your routes.”He detailed his suspicion that the LEZ information didn’t appear on his navigation system, prompting him to delve into the legality of the signage.
The case encompassed seven penalty charge notices, all of which were heard in a virtual hearing by a specialised judge. The judge granted TfL 21 days to present evidence, substantiating the legality and authorization of the signage, which the authority failed to provide. Consequently, the adjudicator ruled in Mr. Willcox’s favour, labelling the signage as “not lawful” and “not authorised.”
For Mr. Willcox, the implications of the fines would have been dire, potentially spelling the end of his business. He noted that complying with ULEZ’s regulations necessitated acquiring Euro-compliant vehicles, a move that incurred significant costs on his business operations, amounting to £2,000 to £4,000 per month to maintain the fleet.
‘A tax on the Working Class’
Reflecting on the broader impact of the recent ULEZ expansion, Mr. Willcox voiced concerns about its effects on working-class individuals, saying, “I predict that this is a tax on the working class.”He criticised the lack of clear benefits in terms of air quality improvement and perceived governmental overreach.
Despite his legal victory, a new challenge emerged as TfL continued to pursue Mr. Willcox for the fines even after the judgement. Mr. Willcox disclosed, “The London mayor came after me, for the 11 and a half 1,000 pounds.”
Mr. Willcox had taken preventive measures by enrolling in the auto-pay system, which accumulated around £4,000 in payments before he halted it upon learning of the judgement’s findings. He highlighted the discrepancy between the court’s order to refund all fees and TfL’s failure to return any money to him.
To reclaim his funds, Mr. Willcox initiated an enforcement process, which culminated in a statutory demand. The demand, which expired last night, signals a turning point, as Mr. Willcox gains further enforcement powers to reclaim his money.
‘Pandora’s Box’
He speculated on TfL’s reluctance to refund him, suggesting that it could set a precedent for reimbursing others, opening a “Pandora’s Box” of similar claims.In conclusion, Mr. Willcox said: “Remarkably on this occasion using the actual judicial process actually worked. So I’ve got to take my hat off to the judiciary and on this occasion, they were 100 percent bang on with their ruling.”
His case highlights the intricate challenges now posed by emission regulations and the ongoing efforts to establish clear legal parameters regarding signage and enforceability.
TfL has claimed that signage for the LEZ was deemed lawful by the Department of Transport in 2008.
It said, “We are investigating why the correct evidence was not submitted.”
Yesterday, protestors gathered outside Downing Street to show discontent at the expansion of the ULEZ zone across the capital, as political fallout from the scheme continues.
