LEZ Signs are Unlawful and therefore Ultra Low Emissions Charges are Unenforceable.

London Scaffolder Boss Noel Willcox contacted Howard Cox as FairFuelUK’s founder and a London Mayoral Candidate to tell me he had won a Court ruling that Low Emissions Signs in London, and by inference ULEZ signs too, are indeed not lawful.

The central issue in his appeal against fines for his commercial vehicles entering LEZs is whether the Low Emission Zone signs are authorised and provide adequate information as to the Low Emission Zone Scheme.

An independent tribunal that decides appeals against congestion charging penalties and low emission zone penalties in London heard Mr Willcox’s appeal.

Graeme Wallington Adjudicator appointed under Regulation 3 of the Road User Charging (Enforcement and Adjudication) (London) Regulations 2001 (as amended) ruled: “I accept the Appellant’s submissions that if the signs are not authorised and do not provide adequate information of the charging scheme then no charge or penalty is payable. Despite having adjourned this appeal to allow TfL the opportunity to submit evidence upon these points, TfL produced no evidence as to either the Low Emission Zone signs being compliant with the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 nor the Traffic Signs Manual or that the signs are otherwise authorised as Non- Standard Traffic Signs or as to the adequacy of the information contained on the signs. In these circumstances, I cannot be satisfied that the Low Emission Zone signs are authorised and lawful.”

“TfL have therefore failed to establish that the contraventions occurred and that the PCNs were lawfully issued. I therefore allow the appeal and direct that the PCNs be cancelled.”

NB: TfL say signage was signed off in 2008…But signage is not featured in, and is not compliant with, 2016 legislation, Schedule 8, Part 4, p115

Founder of FairFuelUK and London Mayoral Candidate for Reform UK, Howard Cox said: “They may have recently won a judicial review, but TfL have been unequivocally told in this London Transport Tribunal ruling; their existing LEZ signage is unlawful which must mean the latest new ULEZ signs cannot be legal either. As you’d expect, TfL are trying to convince us all, they are in the right and the signs are legal. This administratively inept team under a dishonest manipulative mayor believes they are above the law and are putting two fingers up to this transport tribunals decision. It’s clear that all penalty charge fines, and previous fees should now be up for refund. No doubt, Pinocchio in London’s City Hall will blame everyone else for his incompetence. The £millions in fees and fines he has inflicted on low-income drivers and business will mean his huge black hole of a deficit is likely to get even deeper because all these costs will now need to be paid back. It speaks volumes that TfL were given an opportunity to produce evidence that these signs were compliant with the Traffic Signs and Directions 2016 and they completely ignored it. Instead, they sent the bailiffs after Noel Willcox, which shows total contempt. For two years Noel Willcox has been trying to get his legal costs of £4,000 back from TfL. During that time London’s low emission zones brought in £320million in for Transport for London.This Mayor must resign immediately for his continued dishonesty and his TfL’s ineptitude!”

Noel Willcox Owner of Elevation Access Ltd said: “More people must come forward to appeal charges they have been hit with, and reclaim any money they have paid, because the fees are unlawful due to illegal signange, TFL would be seriously out of pocket… I did a FOI request as to how much has been collected under the LEZ and ULEZ. The FOI seems to indicate £124.7million for existing ULEZ, and £37.5million for LEZ – of ‘enforcement income’. I believe the Minister for Transport has not signed off the LEZ or ULEZ initiative and so Mr Harper could overrule The Mayor’s purely cash grabbing initiative.”

Mr Loophole Nick Freeman said: “While Noel’s victory is not binding on other courts, I believe the case of Elevation Access Ltd v TfL can be used by other drivers hit with penalties and fines to appeal. Because this was a hearing at the first level it is not legally binding. But it is what’s known as ‘persuasive’, which means it can be used in other cases. I believe the tribunal made the right ruling and TfL have got it wrong. In my view there is insufficient information on the signs. They don’t comply with the regulations.”