Bentinck Road: road-closure explanation amounted to mitigation (2026)

Case 2250434717 / 2025-12-31 / Adjudicator Richard Thompson

Bentinck Road

“However, their explanation amounts to mitigation only.”

Richard Thompson

The driver explained that the intended route was closed by construction work and that finding an alternative route had proved difficult. Hillingdon said it was unaware of construction work or diversions on the relevant day. Richard Thompson nevertheless accepted the explanation that the driver had faced an unexpected situation.

The CCTV showed the vehicle travelling opposite to the direction signs and road marking. Additional photographs showed further signing that would have been visible to drivers. The contravention itself was not disputed.

The adjudicator found that the explanation amounted to mitigation only. He distinguished Hillingdon's responsibility to consider mitigating circumstances from the tribunal's role in deciding a legal appeal, and refused the appeal on 31 December 2025.

A road closure should be supported by evidence and explained to Hillingdon, but this decision does not make a difficult diversion an exemption. A legal appeal needs a relevant ground, such as an inadequately signed restriction or an applicable exception, rather than only a reason for choosing the route.

Source and case reference

Use case reference 2250434717 in the London Tribunals register to find the official decision. This commentary distinguishes the adjudicator's finding from a possible argument in a different case; previous tribunal decisions do not bind another adjudicator.