Transport for London seeks £1bn over alleged unpaid Ulez charges

Traders Union
All News
Financial News
TfL seeks £1bn Ulez charges

Highlights

Transport for London seeks £1bn from Stellantis, BMW, Jaguar Land Rover, and Nissan over allegedly misleading Ulez emissions data for diesel vehicles.
TfL alleges fraud and negligence in High Court, claiming manufacturers' misrepresented data allowed non-compliant vehicles to avoid charges and undermined pollution reduction.
The court denied TfL's request for more time, requiring claim service by October, while automakers deny wrongdoing and a related case saw initial judgment favoring manufacturers.

High Court dispute over emissions data

As reported by Financial Times, Transport for London alleges that several global manufacturers, including Stellantis, BMW, Jaguar Land Rover and Nissan, provided emissions information that led authorities to treat certain diesel vehicles as compliant when they should have been subject to the Ulez charge.

The court in London hears that TfL is bringing claims of fraud and negligence. Laurence Page, barrister for TfL, says the carmakers “expressly or impliedly represented” that some diesel vehicles met the required standard, and that those representations were false, dishonest, reckless or alternatively negligent, causing losses to the transport authority.

TfL says the disputed vehicle classifications rely on Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency records based on data supplied by manufacturers. According to the authority, that process allowed chargeable vehicles to enter the zone without payment and also weakened efforts to reduce pollution levels in London.

Legal hurdles and wider implications

The claim is tied to a separate lawsuit brought on behalf of 1.6 million motorists who allege carmakers used “defeat devices” to manipulate nitrogen oxide emissions tests. In that case, a judge this month rules largely in favour of the manufacturers, although not all claims are fully closed off, and the claimants’ lawyers plan to appeal the first-stage judgment.

Carmakers have not yet filed defences in TfL’s case, but they deny in the parallel proceedings that regulators or consumers were misled. They argue the vehicle software is lawful and that emissions control systems are needed to prevent issues such as stalling or overheating in certain driving conditions.

James Cutress KC, acting for Stellantis, says TfL is making very serious allegations with potentially far-reaching consequences but has provided no proper details. TfL sought more time to submit the required documents, but the court rejects that request and says the claim form must be served by October.

Our earlier article on the FRC’s action against EY detailed how the regulator fined the firm over audit work on Made.com’s 2021 accounts, focusing on the going concern assessment and a deferred tax asset. The watchdog said the auditors did not sufficiently test management forecasts and models, increasing the risk that investors were given an unreliable picture before the retailer collapsed into administration in 2022.

This material may contain third-party opinions, none of the data and information on this webpage constitutes investment advice according to our Disclaimer. While we adhere to strict Editorial Integrity, this post may contain references to products from our partners.