Steven Bortone, 40, from Southend-on-Sea, said the simple error from 2023 has spiralled out of control and he now has “sleepless nights” over the £589 debt
A dad-of-three was visited by debt collectors after he accidentally paid London’s ULEZ charge on the wrong day.
Steven Bortone, 40, from Southend-on-Sea, said the simple error from 2023 has spiralled out of control and he now has “sleepless nights” over the debt. What made things worse, was Transport for London (TfL) has also initiated a warrant of control – which could leave the dad of three children aged 15, 13 and 10 – at the mercy of repossession on his car or household items.
On July 1 2023, Steven, who is a teacher, drove into Barking, London to volunteer at a STEM club and called the day before to pay the £12.50 charge. However, a few days later, Steven received a penalty charge notice from TfL claiming that he had not paid the charge on July 1.
Confused, Steven checked his bank and noticed the charge was taken out for June 31, not July 1. This meant he had paid the fee for the previous day instead. After reporting this to TfL, he filed an appeal as he believed a fine was warranted as the charge was paid, just on the wrong day describing it as a “weird little admin error”.
But in February of this year, he received two letters from debt collection agencies telling him he needed to pay a penalty of £364. Steven again appealed to TfL, but they repeatedly were rejected. He said: “I called back and forth, and my appeals kept being denied by TfL. An agent suggested I might consider applying for a view by the district judge, but it’s costly.”
“It was just an error made on the day – and now, over a year later, I’m still battling the fine. I accidentally paid for the wrong day. They took payment for the day I called, rather than the day I went in – it was a one day difference. I need TfL to know that I’m acting in good faith – I’ve never not paid.”
On August 1, two debt collectors arrived on Steven’s doorstep, but thankfully, he was able to provide proof of payment, explaining he had left his account the day before he travelled to London. The officers said this would be fine – and would relay the message to their supervisor. Steven added: “They told me it looked like I’d made a genuine effort to resolve this and they walked off with my receipt. I know I shouldn’t have relaxed at that point but I genuinely believed it was all good.”
However, his relief was short-lived as on September 11, he received a text indicating the fine was still outstanding and had shot up to £589. Just three days later, Steven received another letter from TfL dismissing the receipt provided by the debt collectors.
The letter appeared to threaten Steven with repossession and a county court judgment for allegedly “refusing” to pay the fine. Steven said the experience was making him “ill” and “stressed”. He added: “I’ve got three kids to pay for – I’m just trying to do the best I can.”
The case was taken to TfL, which double-downed on the fixed penalty notice but noted that he had made an attempt to pay the correct charge. A TfL spokesman said: “Bortone did correctly receive a penalty charge notice (PCN) as he didn’t pay the Ulez charge for the correct day or within the required period. We asked him to provide proof that he paid for the wrong day but received no response to any of our notices, so the fine increased. As Bortone did originally attempt to pay the charge, we are happy to settle the case on receipt of the original penalty charge.”
