Legislation concerning congestion charge and liability of registered keeper
Request ID: FOI-1184-2223 Date published: 06 September 2022
You asked
1. Please provide me with the specific relevant legislation/regulation/guidance/policy that enables TfL to levy penalty charges against the registered keeper of a vehicle rather than the driver of the vehicle at the time of the offence, and why this is different to any other motoring offence where the driver is liable.
2. Please explain why you do not give reasons for refusing representations against the levy of a penalty charge, or detail the appeals process, in your letters.
3. Please also explain why the liability of the registered owner as opposed to the driver, is not clearly explained on your website or elsewhere on line as your staff have told me that this is an issue for them that they have to deal with every day.
4. Please provide a copy of your Data Protection Publication Scheme.
With thanks.
We answered
TfL Ref: FOI-1184-2223
Thank you for your request received by Transport for London (TfL) on 12th August 2022 asking for information about penalty charges for motoring offences.
Your request has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act and our information access policy.
I can confirm that we hold the information you require. Your questions are answered in turn below:
Question 1. Please provide me with the specific relevant legislation/regulation/guidance/policy that enables TfL to levy penalty charges against the registered keeper of a vehicle rather than the driver of the vehicle at the time of the offence, and why this is different to any other motoring offence where the driver is liable.
Answer: The Congestion Charging Scheme is governed by ‘The Central London Congestion Charging Scheme - The Consolidated Scheme Order’, which is published on our website here:
The legislation sets out that it is the registered keeper of the relevant vehicle who is liable for payment of any penalty charge issued in respect of that vehicle. This is consistent with the legislation governing other civil traffic penalties such as PCNs issued for parking, moving and bus lane contraventions.
Question 2. Please explain why you do not give reasons for refusing representations against the levy of a penalty charge, or detail the appeals process, in your letters.
While there is no express requirement within the legislation that sets out that we must give reasons, we do endeavour to explain in our NOR why we issued the PCN and why we rejected the representation. The NOR also includes information about the options available to the recipient at that time.
Question 3. Please also explain why the liability of the registered owner as opposed to the driver, is not clearly explained on your website or elsewhere on line as your staff have told me that this is an issue for them that they have to deal with every day.
Answer: Please see answer to question 1 above.
Question 4. Please provide a copy of your Data Protection Publication Scheme.
Answer: TfL does not have a “Data Protection Publication Scheme”. However, that said, you may be interested in the following documents:
On 15th August 2022 you asked an additonal question as follows:
“When replying, please could you also state why you feel my enquiry falls within the scope of the Data Protection Act.”
Your request does not fall within the scope of Data Protection law as you are not requesting information relating directly to yourself. Rather, it falls within the scope of the Freedom of Information Act and has been processed as such. Note that information about how to make a Subject Access Request under Data Protection law (i.e., to request personal information we hold about yourself) can be found on our website here:
If this is not the information you are looking for, or if you are unable to access it for any reason, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Please see the attached information sheet for details of your right to appeal as well as information on copyright and what to do if you would like to re-use any of the information we have disclosed.
Yours sincerely,
David Wells FOI Case Officer FOI Case Management Team General Counsel Transport for London
