Request ID: FOI-0948-2122 Date published: 18 August 2021
You asked
1.Are there other motorists who followed the diversion route and paid the charge before penalty?
2. Are there motorists who did not pay the charge and have been issued with PCNs? If so, how many fines have been paid unnecessarily?
3. How many motorists have or are appealing against tfl's PCNs issued following this closure?
We answered
Our ref: FOI-0948-2122/GH
Thank you for your request received by Transport for London (TfL) on 22 July 2021 asking for information about Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) issued at Great Cumberland Place.
Your request has been considered under the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and our information access policy. I can confirm that we do hold some of the information you require.
By way of background, when a ‘planned’ diversion is put in place and vehicles are diverted into the Congestion Charging and Ultra Low Emission Zone we take steps to ensure that no penalties are issued. This includes switching off the Congestion Charging cameras on the diversion route However, on some occasions ‘unplanned’ diversions can be implemented which are usually due to emergency situations such as road traffic accidents or repairs to utility services. In such instances we may not always be immediately notified of the diversion and it can result in some customers incurring penalties. In such cases, when it is shown that the vehicle entered the zone due to the unplanned diversions the penalties are cancelled.
1.Are there other motorists who followed the diversion route and paid the charge before penalty? 2. Are there motorists who did not pay the charge and have been issued with PCNs? If so, how many fines have been paid unnecessarily?
We do not hold the information requested above.
When a motorist pays the Congestion Charge or Ultra Low Emission Zone charge we would not know whether they have purchased the charge due to being diverted into the zone.
Similarly when a penalty has been incurred we do not know why the penalty has been incurred or whether the vehicle entered the zone due to a diversion.
3. How many motorists have or are appealing against tfl’s PCNs issued following this closure?
In order to answer your question, we would have to identify all PCNs issued over the Easter weekend and manually check for all representations received against these PCNs to see if the reasons given were due to this diversion. Providing you with the number of motorists appealing on these grounds would exceed the ‘appropriate limit’ of £450 set by the Freedom of Information (Appropriate Limit and Fees) Regulations 2004.
Under section 12 of the FOI Act, we are not obliged to comply with requests if we estimate that the cost of determining whether we hold the information, locating and retrieving it and extracting it from other information would exceed the appropriate limit. In this instance, we estimate that the time required to answer your request would exceed 18 hours which, at £25 per hour (the rate stipulated by the Regulations), exceeds the ‘appropriate limit’.
If you are not satisfied with this response please see the attached information sheet for details of your right to appeal.
Yours sincerely
Graham Hurt
FOI Case Officer FOI Case Management Team General Counsel Transport for London
