Search questions

• Question by: Valerie Shawcross
• Meeting date: 06 April 2005

Are you saying that you will not be ready to put in a serious bid for funding for phase two in Spending Review 2006?

• Question by: Valerie Shawcross
• Meeting date: 06 April 2005

Moving back to capital for transport infrastructure development, we are probably only about a year away now from the next Spending Review, 2006, can you talk us through what processes of development are going on within TfL to make sure we get a good second bite of the cherry and what preparation and business case development is going on?

• Question by: Valerie Shawcross
• Meeting date: 06 April 2005

If I can be a little more parochial and talk about London again. One of the projects halted until the 2006 Spending Review that is extremely important to London, is the phase two extension on the ELL Project. Given that there is only say a year to go to Spending Review 2006 and you have talked about the fact that you are developing capacity and putting together London Rail at the moment as a business unit, what development is going on of the business cases for phase two of the ELL extension? Especially bearing in mind that there are two...

• Question by: Elizabeth Howlett
• Meeting date: 06 April 2005

We were told first of all by the Mayor that this would prevent congestion, it would also improve air quality, but you do not care about that now and neither does the Mayor - it is only an income raiser.

• Question by: Elizabeth Howlett
• Meeting date: 06 April 2005

Mr Kiley, recently a constituent of mine had her car removed from her driveway in the middle of the night by bailiffs for non-payment of the Congestion Charge. Only through her own quick thinking, was she able to obtain a court injunction to stop the car being sold within two days. She then had to pay excessive fees, to both bailiff company and auctioneer, to recover her car. That her car was taken came as a surprise as, although TfL's bailiffs were able to locate her address to take the car, they were unable to send a penalty charge notice...

• Reference: 2005/0111-1
• Question by: Elizabeth Howlett
• Meeting date: 06 April 2005

Mr Kiley, TfL charges £50 as a standard Penalty Charge Notice, which rises to £100 after 14 days. For appellants who dispute the PCN, there exists the risk that an unsuccessful appeal will incur a fine of £100 should the appeals process be delayed. Is this system of fines being used to disincentivise appeals, and does this represent the use of penalties by TfL as a primarily revenue raising device as opposed to an incentive to obey the law? Also, is it not unfair that customers who pay the Congestion Charge, but state their intention to appeal, are not recognised...

• Reference: 2005/0112-1
• Question by: Elizabeth Howlett
• Meeting date: 06 April 2005

Mr Kiley, recently a constituent of mine paid his Congestion Charge via text message for the first time. He mistakenly entered the letters REG, denoting "registration", before entering his registration number. TfL therefore accepted payment for a car with a ten character number plate. When appealing the subsequent PCN, the adjudicator acknowledged that payment had been received for registration REG XXXX XXX but felt unable, despite my constituent's explanation, to recognise the honest mistake. What guidance exists to stop such an illogical approach being taken again, and is there some method of rectifying such spelling mistakes after payment of the...

• Reference: 2005/0113-1
• Question by: Elizabeth Howlett
• Meeting date: 06 April 2005

Can the Commissioner explain how correspondence from an Assembly Member sent to the Congestion Charge Enforcement Office in Coventry was (a) not recorded (b) not responded to? What facility exists for processing correspondence in TfL's Coventry Congestion Charging Enforcement office that does not have a customer reference number? What assurances can the Commissioner give that correspondence to TfL from Assembly Members will be answered promptly?

• Reference: 2005/0114-1
• Question by: Elizabeth Howlett
• Meeting date: 06 April 2005

Can the Commissioner advise the Assembly what information is given to customer's who have their car impounded regarding their legal rights, specifically with regard to ensuring confiscated vehicles are not sold prior to independent adjudication?

• Reference: 2005/0115-1
• Question by: Elizabeth Howlett
• Meeting date: 06 April 2005

Mr Kiley, recently a constituent of mine had her car removed from her driveway in the middle of the night by bailiffs for non-payment of the Congestion Charge. Only through her own quick thinking, was she able to obtain a court injunction to stop the car being sold within two days. She then had to pay excessive fees, to both bailiff company and auctioneer, to recover her car. That her car was taken came as a surprise as, though TfL's bailiffs were able to locate her address to take the car, they were unable to send a Penalty Charge Notice...