TfL Staff Racked Up £30,000 in Parking Fines While Fare Payers Picked Up the Bill

LONDON - Red double decker buses and other traffic.
LONDON - Red double decker buses and other traffic (image courtesy Deposit Photos)
LONDON - Red double decker buses and other traffic.
LONDON - Red double decker buses and other traffic (image courtesy Deposit Photos)

Transport for London staff paid out more than £30,000 in parking fines and road charges in the space of a single year, according to figures released after a Freedom of Information request. The bill includes £16,000 handed to 20 different local authorities across the capital, £9,460 paid straight back to TfL itself, and a further £6,631 collected by private parking firms including Euro Car Parks.

The disclosure covers transactions under £250 made on TfL staff credit cards between April 2025 and March 2026. It lands weeks after the network raised tube fares by an average of 5.8%, with bus and tram fares set to climb again in November. For a body that issued 9,460 penalty charge notices to its own employees, and whose parent authority oversees a wider London PCN total that topped 9.46 million last year, the figures have drawn accusations of double standards from politicians and campaigners.

Officials at TfL say the fines mostly happen when staff need to park at the nearest available spot to reach an incident, then settle the ticket on a company card while the paperwork catches up. The organisation says staff are expected to pay TfL back “when appropriate”, but the FOI response gives no figure for how much of the £30,000 has actually been recovered from employees, or how long that process typically takes.

Who picks up the tab

The 143 parking fines paid to borough councils and the £9,460 paid to TfL’s own enforcement teams were all logged under two departments: the chief operating officer’s office and the chief customer and strategy officer’s office. Roughly 80 credit cards are assigned to staff for this kind of spending, of which 60 have been active in recent months.

Gareth Bacon, shadow minister for London, told local reporters that TfL had “wasted no opportunity to fleece Londoners, especially drivers, whilst pleading poverty.” London Assembly member Neil Garratt calculated the total works out at close to £600 a week and questioned why an organisation that says it is short of cash “feels it can flex the company card in this way.” Jonathan Eida of the TaxPayers’ Alliance put it more bluntly, saying TfL “cannot lecture passengers about paying their way while its own spending records raise serious questions about basic financial discipline.”

TfL routinely publishes external payments and individual transactions over £250, in line with its transparency commitments as a body funded through the Greater London Authority. Spending below that threshold, where the bulk of these parking fines sit, is not published as a matter of course and only came to light through the FOI request.

A pattern that goes beyond one organisation

TfL is not the first public body caught paying its own staff’s parking fines with money that in the end comes from taxpayers and fare payers. Hackney Council disclosed earlier this month that it spent more than £10,000 on parking fines racked up by its own employees over twelve months, a figure a third of the size of TfL’s while covering a single borough rather than the whole capital. What sets the TfL figures apart is scale and a sharper irony: TfL is both the body writing PCNs to Londoners through its own enforcement operation and, through its staff, a repeat recipient of PCNs written by other councils entirely.

London’s overall PCN volume has been rising fast. Councils, TfL and the London Lorry Control Scheme issued 9,462,185 penalty charge notices across the capital in 2024/25, up from 8,333,486 the year before, a jump of roughly 1.13 million notices in a single year. That growth has been driven by an expanding network of controlled parking zones, school street restrictions, bus gates and low traffic measures, alongside tighter camera enforcement. Ordinary drivers who get one of those notices face a strict, published appeals window. TfL staff whose fines are paid by a company card appear to face no such deadline pressure, and no public record shows whether any employee has ever missed a repayment entirely.

What TfL says happened

A TfL spokesperson told the Local Democracy Reporting Service that “for urgent operational reasons, vehicles sometimes have to be parked at the closest access point to the incident location,” adding that staff use company cards so that fines linked to an operational issue get paid quickly rather than escalating to a debt collection stage. The spokesperson said credit cards are also used to test TfL’s own payment platforms, including Oyster top-ups and road user charge payments, ahead of software updates, a process that can generate small transactions unrelated to actual parking offences.

TfL says the process is “regularly reviewed” to check that payments are properly authorised, recorded and reimbursed by the staff member responsible. It has not published a breakdown of how many of the 143 council fines and 47 direct TfL PCNs were operational necessities against how many were simple parking mistakes by staff going about ordinary business.

What this means if you get a parking fine in London

The gap between how TfL handles its own staff’s fines and how it expects the public to respond is worth knowing if you ever find a penalty charge notice on your windscreen in the capital.

A PCN issued by a council or TfL gives you 28 days to pay or appeal, with a 50% discount if you settle within 14 days. If you believe the fine was wrongly issued, whether the reason is unclear signage, a valid parking permit that was not recognised, or a loading exception that applied at the time, you can lodge an informal challenge directly with the issuing authority before the formal Penalty Charge Notice stage closes. Keep photographs of the signage, your ticket or permit, and the exact time you parked, as these are the details that decide most successful appeals.

If your informal challenge is rejected and you still believe the fine is wrong, you can escalate to a formal representation, and from there to an independent adjudicator at London Tribunals if the council rejects that too. Adjudicators are legally qualified and operate independently of the council that issued the fine, and a meaningful share of appeals that reach this stage succeed, most often where signage did not meet the required standard or where an exemption was not properly applied.

For private parking charges, such as those issued by firms operating on retail or estate car parks, the new Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice requires operators to give a 10-minute grace period before and after a stay and to display compliant signage. If a private firm’s signage or process falls short of the code, that failure can support a challenge through the operator’s own appeals process or the independent appeals service it is signed up to.

Anyone who wants to see how their own council enforces parking, and how quickly it collects unpaid fines compared with how it handles its own staff, can request the same kind of Freedom of Information disclosure that revealed the TfL figures. Requests can be submitted free of charge directly to the relevant local authority or transport body, and must be answered within 20 working days.

The scale of London’s overall enforcement operation makes the gap harder to ignore. Nine councils, TfL and the London Lorry Control Scheme together wrote well over nine million penalty charge notices last year, each one carrying the same 28-day clock and the same threat of debt recovery action for anyone who misses it. A driver who parks on the wrong side of a suspended bay for ten minutes faces exactly the same process as a TfL employee who leaves a van on a yellow line to attend an incident, on paper at least. The FOI figures suggest the two experiences look very different in practice, and that gap is precisely what campaigners want TfL to close before the next fare rise lands.


Sources:

Jarrod Partridge

Jarrod Partridge is the founder of Motoring Chronicle and an FIA accredited journalist with over 30 years of experience following motorsport and the global automotive industry. A member of the AIPS International Sports Press Association, Jarrod has covered Formula 1 races and automotive events at venues around the world, bringing first-hand insight to every race report, car review, and industry analysis he writes. His work spans the full breadth of motoring — from the latest EV launches and road car reviews to the cutting edge of motorsport competition.

Leave a Comment

More in News

New SUV parked on a desert road with mountains in the background.

Arizona Voters Approve Photo Radar Ban, but $250 Tempe Camera Tickets Stand

Arizona voters passed Proposition 319, a ban on new photo ...
Speed camera

Alabama I-65 Work Zone Cameras Can Mail $250 Tickets No Sooner Than Nov. 16

A photo speed enforcement pilot on I-65 near milepost 209 ...
Hunton Bridge, UK - February 23, 2020: Evening traffic on busiest British motorway M25 — Photo by JarekKilian

Why Hogging the Middle Lane Risks a £100 Police Fine and 3 Points

Staying in the middle lane of a motorway with the ...
LONDON, UK - 12TH DECEMBER 22: Residential houses and cars covered in snow down a street in London during the winter months. — Photo by macinlondon

What Idling to Warm Your Car Can Cost Every Driver, From £20 to £80

Rule 123 of the Highway Code bars drivers from leaving ...
Trailer safety: tow WISER this summer

What You Can Tow on a Car Licence (and the Limit Your Car Sets)

A car licence passed from 1 January 1997 covers a ...

Trending on Motoring Chronicle

Panguitch,Utah - July 20: Row of Semi trailer trucks July 20, 2009 in Panguitch,Utah, There are about 5.6 million semi trailers (or tractor trailers) registered for use in the U.S., almost three times the number of semi trucks. — Photo by snehitdesign

Diesel Prices Cross $6 a Gallon for the First Time in US History

The national average price of diesel crossed $6 a gallon ...
Freedom or safety for young drivers? UK can and must deliver both, says GEM 11/05/2026 SHARE: Images are for editorial use only. Experts gathering at Young Driver Focus in London on 13 May to press for action, not further delay Young drivers remain disproportionately at risk, with preventable deaths continuing on UK roads International evidence shows graduated driver licensing can cut crashes by up to 40% GEM Motoring Assist will return to the RAC Club, London, on 13 May as headline sponsor of Young Driver Focus 2026, renewing calls for decisive action to improve protection for newly-qualified drivers. Despite years of evidence and advocacy, the UK has yet to introduce a comprehensive system of graduated driver licensing (GDL) - a move GEM and other road safety groups say is costing young lives. GEM head of road safety James Luckhurst said: “We are long past the point of asking whether we should act. The evidence is overwhelming, and the consequences of delay are measured in lives lost and families devastated.” GDL is a phased approach that allows new drivers to gain experience under lower-risk conditions before progressing to full driving privileges. Common measures include limits on late-night driving and restrictions on carrying same-age passengers during the months after passing the test. International research consistently shows crash reductions of between 20% and 40% where GDL systems are in place. In some regions of Canada, reductions in young driver deaths have exceeded 80%. In the UK, drivers aged 17 to 24 account for around 20% of road deaths, despite making up just 7% of licence holders. Inexperience, distraction and overconfidence remain key risk factors - precisely the issues GDL is designed to address. GEM stresses that a well-designed system supports rather than penalises young people, and a recent TRL review1 found no significant negative impact on access to education, employment or social activity. GEM supports a system that extends structured learning, reduces known high-risk conditions and allows young drivers to build skills progressively and safely. GEM head of road safety James Luckhurst said: “We do many things well in the UK, particularly in driver training, but the current system offers too little structured support once someone passes the test. That’s where the real risk begins. “The choice is simple: continue with a system we know is failing too many young people, or take proven steps that will save lives. Doing nothing is not a neutral position - it is a decision with consequences… and Young Driver Focus offers a chance to translate the latest insight into real-world action.”

What the New GOV.UK Wallet Means for Every UK Driver This Year

A digital driving licence is rolling out through the GOV.UK ...
Close up of a used Car. Sold sign is in the window. Used car signage clearly seen in the background

Car Dealer Hid a Written-Off Vehicle’s Past and Refused Two Refunds

A Westbury car dealer has been ordered to pay £4,000 ...
Andrea Caldarelli pushes the new Lamborghini Temerario to the limit [Photo Gallery]

Andrea Caldarelli pushes the new Lamborghini Temerario to the limit [Photo Gallery]

The Lamborghini Temerario, the only production super sports car able ...
Geely EX5

Geely EX5 review: Bargain, family-sized electric SUV has a touch of class

We road test the first model from a Chinese brand ...