Transport for London has refused to refund owners of imported cars charged under the ultra low emission zone, despite internal documents showing it accepted evidence that some affected models were likely to meet the required emissions standard.
Drivers have been paying the £12.50 daily charge and receiving penalties for years because their vehicles are not recognised as compliant by TfL’s registration system. Nissan has supplied information about early-2000s models, including the Cube and Fairlady Z, but owners must still complete the individual documentation process before charges stop.
The dispute raises questions about how TfL distinguishes between a vehicle’s emissions and the paperwork needed to establish its status. It also leaves unresolved how many drivers have paid charges or penalties for cars that may meet the scheme’s requirements.
Imported cars face a separate evidence process
ULEZ charges drivers of non-compliant vehicles £12.50 a day. Penalties are £90, rising to £180 if paid late. For owners whose cars remain classified as non-compliant, the daily charge continues to apply until the required evidence has been supplied and their vehicles are recognised as meeting the standard.
TfL’s system recognises European emissions ratings. Cars built for other markets, particularly Japan, are therefore treated as non-compliant unless their owners obtain a Certificate of Conformity and supporting paperwork from the manufacturer.
That creates a distinction between cars which fail the emissions requirements and cars whose compliance has not been established through TfL’s documentation process. The vehicles identified by Nissan fall within a dispute over the latter: whether evidence about particular models should be enough to change their treatment.
The issue does not establish that every imported car qualifies for an exemption. The evidence concerns models believed to meet the required standard, while TfL maintains that vehicles built for markets outside Europe are subject to different standards and need the appropriate supporting documents.
Nissan’s evidence did not lead to refunds
Nissan wrote to TfL earlier this year with a list of early-2000s models believed to have been caught by the charging system despite meeting the emissions standard. The Nissan Cube and Fairlady Z were among the vehicles identified.
According to internal TfL documents, the transport authority accepted that Nissan’s evidence was likely correct. It nevertheless decided not to exempt the vehicles on that basis and ruled out refunds for drivers who had already paid.
The documents therefore point to an administrative dispute rather than a confirmed finding that the affected cars produce emissions above the permitted level. TfL’s acceptance that the vehicles were likely compliant has not translated into automatic recognition of those models within the charging system.
Owners must still obtain a Certificate of Conformity and complete the supporting paperwork. Nissan’s communication has not removed that requirement, even for drivers of the models it identified.
No total has been supplied for the number of affected vehicles, the number of drivers who have paid or the value of charges and penalties involved. Nor does the available information establish that every payment made by an owner of one of the listed models was wrongly collected.
TfL says compliance must be documented
TfL says cars built for markets outside Europe are subject to different standards and that compliance can only be proved from the moment the necessary evidence is supplied. Its position makes the submission of paperwork central both to recognition of a vehicle and to its refusal to refund previous payments.
The authority also says it has been working with Nissan UK to help owners submit the correct documents. That assistance does not change the requirement for drivers to complete the full process before their cars are recognised as compliant.
The unresolved fairness question is whether owners should bear charges for the period before submitting evidence when TfL has already accepted that information about their vehicle models is likely correct. The internal assessment and the authority’s decision on refunds remain separate.
Road charges enter the election debate
The dispute has emerged as road charges come under scrutiny in the approaching mayoral election campaign. The Conservative candidate has promised a review of every charge imposed by City Hall, making the treatment of imported cars relevant to that wider debate.
No change to the documentation requirement or refund decision has been announced in the supplied information. For affected owners, the next step remains obtaining the manufacturer’s evidence and submitting the correct paperwork, while the extent of past payments by drivers of potentially compliant imports remains unknown.
