A ULEZ-related receipt did not pay the LEZ charge (2026)

Case 9250339305 / 2025-08-26 / Adjudicator Anthony Baker

Ruislip Road

“Payment was made at an amount referring to ULEZ rather than LEZ”

Anthony Baker

The appellant disputed an LEZ penalty for a journey on 8 April 2025, supplying a third-party receipt for £17.50 dated that day. He believed he had paid the required charge. TfL said no payment had reached it for the LEZ journey and relied on photographs, keeper records and an accounts screenshot.

Anthony Baker found that the vehicle's use of the LEZ, keeper identity and non-compliance with LEZ requirements were not disputed. Although a payment had been attempted, it was not for the correct amount, scheme or payment route. The receipt referred to ULEZ and came from a website unaffiliated with TfL; it did not establish that TfL had received the LEZ charge.

The appeal was refused on the evidence. This was an LEZ decision despite the ULEZ wording on the receipt. Its practical distinction is between evidence of a transaction and evidence that the required charge for the actual scheme and journey was paid.

Source and case reference

Use case reference 9250339305 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.