You have previously denied that you had any knowledge of this. This bridge was closed as a major sporting event was occurring. This has been confirmed by the City of London as operators and owners of the bridge. They advise that they had fully appraised you of this yet you appear to have no records thereof Please admit or deny We had knowledge of closure to the bridge on 28/07/19. We deactivated cameras so that vehicles on diversion were not charged. Please advise the number of ULEZ penalties which were issues that day for traffic entering into any area close to tower bridge. Please confirm your policy of looking at representations made following vehicles being diverted

---

TfL Ref: 1896-1920/1901-1920

Thank you for your requests received by us on 25 September 2019 asking for information about the Tower Bridge Closure on 28 July 2019 following your previous requests for information (references:1484-1920 and 1851-1920).

Your requests have 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. You asked for the following respectively:

Tower bridge closure 28/07/19

You have previously denied that you had any knowledge of this.
This bridge was closed as a major sporting event was occurring.
This has been confirmed by the City of London as operators and owners of the bridge.
They advise that they had fully appraised you of this yet you appear to have no records thereof
Please admit or deny
We had knowledge of closure to the bridge on 28/07/19.

We deactivated cameras so that vehicles on diversion were not charged.

Please advise the number of ULEZ penalties which were issues that day for traffic entering into any area close to tower bridge.

Please confirm your policy of looking at representations made following vehicles being diverted

************

Please reconcile the concept given in Foi 1484-1920 gh and Foi 1851-1920

Your response to Foi 1484-1920 suggests that you follow certain procedures
Your response to Foi 1851-1920 states that for tower bridge you do not have the information
This information appears to be contradictory
Please explain

Our response to your previous request FOI 1484-1920, outlines the procedure we follow when vehicles are diverted into the Ultra Low Emissions Zone (ULEZ). We also advised you that the closure of Tower Bridge is managed by the City of London rather than TfL. We responded with the following:

1. If a non exempt vehicle e terms the zone as it has been directed to do so because of roadworks or similar,is a penalty charge levied?

When a diversion is in place on our network we temporarily disable our enforcement cameras for the duration. As long as the diversionary route in place is followed, a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) should not be issued.

2. Is this waived if a representation is made?

We consider each representation on a case by case basis. If a driver explains they were diverted into the charging zone, we will cancel the PCN upon the receipt of clear evidence being provided

We were not advised by the City of London that vehicles were being diverted into the ULEZ on 28 July and therefore we did not take any steps to prevent Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) being issued. While road closures may have been in place, we have not received any information to indicate vehicles were being diverted into the ULEZ.

In respect of your request for the number of ULEZ PCNs issued on 28 July, the nearest two entrance and exit points to the ULEZ near Tower Bridge are to the North side at Tower Hill and on the South side on Tooley Street. On 28 July 2019, a total of 47 ULEZ PCNs were issued as a result of non-compliant vehicles being observed by these cameras without payment of the charge.

When we receive a representation stating a vehicle was driven into the zone as the result of a diversion we will base a decision on the evidence available to us. If we are aware that there was a diversion in place which took vehicles into the zone and the vehicle kept to the diversion route the representation will be accepted and the penalty cancelled. If the vehicle was observed away for the diversion route, or we do not have a record of a diversion being in place the representation will be rejected. However, each representation is considered on a case by case basis with all evidence and mitigating factors taken into account.

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

Jasmine Howard
FOI Case Officer
Information Governance
Transport For London

Back to top

---