LTN fines are penalties issued to drivers who enter roads in low traffic neighbourhoods that are restricted to through traffic, effectively charging motorists for breaking the traffic rules.
The Telegraph reported that Croydon residents launched a judicial review claiming the council acted “unlawfully” by effectively taxing motorists while it was in “dire financial straits”.
Kevin Leigh, a barrister representing the residents, told the court on Thursday (December 4) that the introduction of LTNs was motivated “clearly by the huge revenue that comes from enforcement”.
He added: “It’s clearly about the money.
“That’s the driver here.
“It’s not coincidental that this happened at the same time the council was in dire financial straits.
“There’s an ulterior motive.”
The council, which has gone bankrupt three times in the past five years, first introduced LTNs in 2020 and made them permanent in February 2024.
The schemes use automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) cameras to restrict traffic on certain routes.
Shortly before the schemes were made permanent, councillors were given a report by council officers indicating that the LTNs would generate millions from fines issued to motorists entering restricted roads.
The report said the schemes were expected to deliver a £10.7 million surplus over four years.
Mr Leigh told the court the council had “put these traffic orders in place expecting them to be breached regularly”, and claimed the schemes were having “draconian effects” on residents.
He said: “They can’t get to their homes, people can’t visit them, and all the traffic gets pushed out into the surrounding area.”
He challenged the council’s claim that the main purpose of the schemes was to reduce pollution, improve road safety, and encourage walking and cycling.
He also cited a Telegraph report from last year in which Mayor Jason Perry admitted he could not fulfil an election pledge to scrap the LTNs.
He said local authorities have no legal powers to use traffic measures to “raise revenue”, which would be “tantamount to taxation”.
Saira Kabir Sheikh KC, representing the council, said the decision to make the schemes permanent was based on a detailed officer report.
She said: “The decision was made following a statutory process and there’s no suggestion by the claimant that statutory processes were not followed or any steps in that process were missed out.
“It doesn’t matter whether the claimant doesn’t agree with the decision, it’s about whether it was lawful.”
“There’s nothing in that report which suggests the order was made, or recommended to be made, for any financial purposes.
“It didn’t form any of the reasons for that decision.
“Only lawful recommendations were made to the Cabinet and that’s enough to dispose of this claim.”
Judge Edward Pepperall will give his written judgment later this month.
We have contacted Croydon Council for a comment.
