Police confirmation supported the cloned-vehicle explanation (2026)

Case 2250229161 / 2025-09-04 / Adjudicator Edward Houghton

Blake Hall Road

“The Appeal is therefore allowed.”

Edward Houghton

The PCN concerned a mandatory cycle lane on Blake Hall Road. The motorist disputed that their own vehicle was responsible and supplied an email from a police officer confirming cloning. Redbridge questioned the email because a police control contact could not identify the report without a reference number.

Edward Houghton did not consider that response convincing evidence against the email. He questioned why the authority had not contacted the officer directly to verify the report. On the evidence before him, he found cloning established on the balance of probabilities and allowed the appeal on 4 September 2025.

The appeal succeeded on vehicle identity, not on the validity of the cycle lane, the clarity of its signs or an exemption for entering it. The decision does not mean that an unsupported allegation of cloning is sufficient. Its reasoning depended on the supporting police correspondence and the weakness of the authority's rebuttal.

For a genuine cloning dispute, compare the recorded vehicle with your own and provide the supporting police report or correspondence. Identify checkable differences and any relevant evidence of your vehicle's whereabouts. Ask the authority to address that evidence directly rather than relying on the matching registration alone.

Source and case reference

Use case reference 2250229161 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.