What Drivers Fined £100 Under a 40mph Limit a Court Found Invalid Can Do

• Kingston Crown Court ruled in October that the order behind a 40mph limit on the A20 between Sidcup and Swanley from October 2023 to October 2024 was invalid after finding that the official who signed it lacked the authority.
• Around 62,000 drivers were caught in the first six weeks, the total is believed to top 66,000 fines worth at least £6.6 million, and the Mayor of London’s office says no wrongdoing was alleged by the court.
• A Crown Court ruling binds no other court, so every fined driver faces an individual challenge and TfL says it will resist the appeals.

The Signature That Decided a £100 Fine

A driver who paid £100 and took three penalty points for speeding on the A20 between Sidcup and Swanley, in the year the limit sat at 40mph, now has a question to put to the courts: did the person who signed the order have the power to make it? Kingston Crown Court decided in October 2026 that the person did not, and the finding cleared one driver, John Abbott of Bexley, of speeding.

The ruling does not wipe out any other fine or conviction by itself. Lawyers say a Crown Court judgment does not automatically overturn other convictions, and only the High Court, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court set rules that other judges must follow. TfL says the same and says it will support the Metropolitan Police in resisting the appeals it expects.

For a driver caught on that stretch, three checks come first: the date and place on the notice, whether the £100 was paid or the case went to court, and whether the points still sit on the licence. The routes open after that, a solicitor, the court that dealt with the case and the Criminal Cases Review Commission, are set out below.

What Happened on the A20 and How Many Were Caught

In October 2023 TfL officials used a traffic order to cut the limit on the A20 between Sidcup and Swanley from 70mph to 40mph after cars skidded off the road in heavy rain. The Metropolitan Police put the start date at 18 October 2023. TfL says it acted after a number of serious incidents caused by flooding, which posed a risk to life. An average speed camera went in, and around 62,000 drivers were caught in the first six weeks alone.

By April 2024 the camera had become the most prolific speed camera in the country, and the fines on that stretch had passed £6 million. Drivers said the signs at Crittals Corner were too small and that sat navs still showed the old limit. Louie French, MP for Old Bexley and Sidcup, said at least one sign wrongly said the limit was still 50mph. The Metropolitan Police said at the time that the signage was legal and correct. Temporary limits like this one are among the least visible to a driver, and the earlier Motoring Chronicle report on temporary limits missing from sat navs explains why a screen cannot be trusted to carry them.

Drivers could not read the order either. TfL’s network regulation manager, Gerard O’Toole, agreed at Bromley magistrates’ court in August 2025 that making a traffic order is a serious step that can criminalise actions that were not criminal before. He later said of temporary orders: “There’s no statutory requirement on us to publish them.” He added that TfL had advertised the A20 change in two local newspapers, the Bexley News and the News Shopper.

The scale is large. TfL refuses to say how many drivers were fined, and the number is believed to be more than 66,000. At £100 each, 66,000 fines come to £6.6 million, in line with the estimate that the change raised at least £6.6 million for TfL. Many drivers accepted the £100 and the three points. Some lost licences and jobs. A sales representative from Sheerness who needs his licence for work was banned after four tickets in a week; four fines of three points each would reach 12, the total at which gov.uk says a driver can be disqualified when it falls within 3 years. Colleen Blackburn, who lives with Crohn’s disease, describes herself as “scared to drive again”.

In October 2024 TfL confirmed the 70mph limit would return on 30 October 2024, and says it removed the temporary restriction after it repaired and resurfaced the road.

What Kingston Crown Court Found

The gap between paying and fighting is wide. John Dunlop took his case to trial at Bromley magistrates’ court in August 2025. TfL staff Gerard O’Toole and Gary Oliver gave evidence for the Metropolitan Police prosecution, and Mr Oliver told District Judge Sarah Turnock that he was one of the people able to sign off the order. Mr Dunlop was found guilty and fined £150, with £650 in prosecution costs and a £60 victim surcharge. That comes to £860 against the £100 most drivers paid. One case is not a tariff, but it shows what a lost challenge cost.

Mr Dunlop’s defence rested partly on the order having been invalidly made. He also argued that the temporary signs were below the legal minimum size and fixed too low at the roadside, and that the order itself could not be read by any member of the public. Outside court he said: “TfL can make the law, refuse to publish the law and prosecute people under that law.”

Mr Abbott’s challenge reached Kingston Crown Court in October 2026. By his account it was the twelfth hearing in his case and the first time the question of the signature had been raised. Mr O’Toole was asked about the rules in force when the limit changed, and he “clarified his evidence”, saying he “did not want to mislead the court”. He said that in 2024 he had learned that a document listing the officers authorised to change speed limits did not include Mr Oliver, and that TfL’s legal department had told him this was an administrative mistake and the decision was still lawful.

TfL then handed over a 2022 document marked “TfL RESTRICTED”. The court ruled that the document did not give Mr Oliver the power to change speed limits and that “at that time only the directors and heads of departments named appeared”. The order lowering the limit between October 2023 and October 2024 was invalid. The court accepted that Mr O’Toole had taken legal advice and acted in good faith. The Crown Prosecution Service says it had been involved only in presenting the case against Mr Abbott’s appeal, that the further evidence was served on the court and the defendant in the course of an adjournment, and that the court concluded there was no case to answer.

The disagreement is sharp. Thomas Turrell, the London Assembly Conservatives’ transport spokesman, calls the episode “an almighty motoring miscarriage of justice” and wants an independent inquiry. Mr Dunlop, now a principal of the A20 Alliance campaign group, says he thinks TfL concealed the correct documents and misled the court. TfL rejects that. Its spokesman says “any suggestion of wrongdoing, or that evidence or information was improperly withheld, is false”. A spokesman for the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, adds: “No wrongdoing was alleged by the court, traffic regulation orders were made lawfully, and all TfL staff acted in accordance with authorisation.” The Metropolitan Police declined to comment but says it did not collude with TfL or other public bodies to cover up evidence.

The politics ran earlier. Three MPs, Laura Trott, Louie French and Gareth Bacon, wrote to the Mayor in January 2025 and got no reply. In February 2025 the London Assembly passed a motion by 16 votes to three demanding an independent investigation into the temporary limits on the A20, which raised the possibility that the wrong officer had signed the order. The Mayor vetoed it, saying TfL’s traffic orders team was looking into the points raised.

What One Crown Court Ruling Can and Cannot Do

The finding is a court’s decision about one order in one case, and the order covers every fine on that stretch for a year. Legal action by thousands of motorists who want to clear their names is expected. A fine issued under the same order faces the same question: did the signature carry the power?

A Crown Court ruling is not binding on other courts. Only the High Court, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court set precedents that other judges must follow. TfL leans on this point and says the ruling does not set a binding precedent on any other cases. Its stated position is resistance, not repayment: it says it will support the Metropolitan Police in resisting the upcoming appeals.

The practical effect is that each driver argues their own case. A magistrates’ court or a Crown Court can follow the Kingston reasoning, and the document that decided it is now in the open, but none has to. The first rulings on the appeals will show how far the finding travels.

What a Fined Driver Can Check and Do Now

Start with the paperwork. The notice carries the date and place of the offence. The finding concerns the order that lowered the A20 limit between Sidcup and Swanley from October 2023 to October 2024, so a fine from another road or another year is a different matter. Keep the notice, the proof of payment and any court papers. Mr Abbott’s case turned on a 2022 document that reached the court at his twelfth hearing.

Check the licence next. Gov.uk says the courts can fine a driver and endorse the record with penalty points on conviction, and that a driver can view the licence record to see which points are held and when they will be removed. Endorsements stay on the record for 4 or 11 years depending on the offence, and 12 or more points within 3 years can mean disqualification. Points also reach the insurance bill: Motoring Chronicle’s earlier analysis of three points raising insurance premiums put the cost at about £108 a year on a £726 average policy, using WTW research.

Then talk to a specialist. A solicitor or motoring law adviser can say whether a particular conviction can still be appealed and which court hears it. Mr Abbott reached Kingston Crown Court by challenging his conviction. A specialist motoring law firm was already taking A20 cases in 2024, when Dominic Smith of Patterson Law said he believed the fines were unjust and drivers had a strong defence, and a 4,000-strong Facebook group had formed. Mr Dunlop is now a principal of the A20 Alliance, a campaign group fighting the fines.

For a conviction that stands, the Criminal Cases Review Commission is the independent public body that reviews possible miscarriages of justice in the criminal courts of England, Wales and Northern Ireland and refers cases to the appeal courts.

Nothing here is a refund guarantee. TfL says the enforcement was necessary for safety, and its position that the order was made lawfully will be tested in the appeals it expects. Motoring Chronicle’s earlier report on speeding fines at a four-year high found that 22 of the 24 police forces that answered a Freedom of Information request issued more speeding fixed penalty notices in 2025 than in 2024.

Want more car content? Add us as a preferred source on Google to your favourites list for the best automotive news and analysis on the internet.

If you enjoyed this article, be sure to follow us on Microsoft Start.