When Pushing Your Car Still Gets You a Fine: The Haringey Delivery Driver Case

A Lesson Every Driver Needs to Read Before Entering a Restricted Zone

Here is a scenario that sounds almost absurd at first glance: a delivery driver, presumably trying to do the right thing, switches off his engine and physically pushes his vehicle through a restricted road. No engine running. No emissions. No motor vehicle in any meaningful sense, you might think. And yet he still received a Penalty Charge Notice — and the tribunal upheld it.

This case, decided by a London tribunal adjudicator following an appeal against the London Borough of Haringey, is one of those quietly significant rulings that reveals just how strictly the law around vehicle restriction zones is interpreted. If you have ever assumed that clever workarounds — turning off your engine, being towed, or coasting through — might save you from a fine, this case is essential reading.

What Happened

On the evening of 27 January 2024, at around 8 o'clock at night, a driver entered Clarendon Road and Avondale Road in Haringey — a route subject to a prohibition on certain types of vehicle, specifically motor vehicles.

The driver was working as a delivery courier. He clearly knew the restriction existed, because rather than driving through normally, he turned off his engine and pushed his vehicle through the restricted area. It is reasonable to assume he believed this would either avoid the contravention entirely or at least provide a strong enough argument to get any fine cancelled.

The council issued a PCN under the contravention code for failing to comply with a prohibition on certain types of vehicle. The driver appealed, explaining what he had done and why. The adjudicator reviewed the evidence, watched the CCTV footage, and refused the appeal.

The Arguments

The driver's case was straightforward and, on the face of it, not unreasonable. His argument was essentially this: the restriction applies to motor vehicles. A motor vehicle is defined by its use of a motor — an engine. If the engine is off and the vehicle is being pushed by human effort, it is not, in any practical sense, being operated as a motor vehicle. He was, in effect, arguing that he had found a lawful way through.

The council's position was simpler and more absolute. The Traffic Management Order (TMO) governing that stretch of road prohibits causing or permitting a vehicle to enter a prohibited area. The restriction is triggered the moment a prohibited vehicle passes the signs at the entrance to the zone. How that vehicle moves — whether driven, pushed, towed, or even carried — is entirely irrelevant to whether the contravention has been committed.

The Decision

The adjudicator refused the appeal. Having watched the CCTV footage and reviewed the evidence, they were satisfied that the vehicle had entered the restricted zone past the prohibitory signs. That was sufficient to establish the contravention.

The adjudicator also addressed the driver's argument directly and firmly: even if everything he said was true — engine off, vehicle pushed — it made no difference to whether the law had been broken. The act of causing the vehicle to pass the signs and enter the restricted area was the contravention. Nothing more was required.

The driver's explanation was acknowledged, but treated as mitigation rather than a defence. And crucially, the adjudicator made clear that mitigation is not something a tribunal can act upon — the council had already considered it, and the adjudicator's role is to apply the law as it stands, not to substitute their own judgement about fairness.

The Legal Reasoning, Explained in Plain English

This is where the case gets genuinely interesting, and where many drivers — and even some legal commentators — might find the outcome surprising.

The key phrase in the Traffic Management Order is "causing or permitting." This is a standard formulation in road traffic and parking law, and it is deliberately broad. It does not say "driving" or "operating." It says causing. The moment you cause your vehicle to cross that threshold — regardless of how — you have committed the contravention.

Think of it this way: if a restriction said "no dogs allowed in this park," and you carried your dog through the gate rather than letting it walk, the dog would still be in the park. The method of entry does not change the fact of entry.

The restriction targets the vehicle, not the act of driving. Motor vehicle restrictions are designed to keep certain types of vehicle out of an area entirely — for reasons that might include road safety, air quality, pedestrian protection, or traffic management. None of those purposes are served by allowing the same vehicles through as long as their engines are switched off.

Mitigation is not a defence. This is a point the adjudicator stressed, and it is one that trips up many appellants. Mitigation means explaining why you did something — circumstances that make it understandable or even sympathetic. A defence means arguing that the contravention was not committed, or that a legal exemption applies. The driver here had mitigation (he was working, he tried to comply, he pushed the vehicle). He did not have a defence. The adjudicator has no power to cancel a PCN on grounds of mitigation — that power rests with the council, which had already considered and rejected it.

CCTV evidence sealed the case. The adjudicator watched the footage and confirmed the vehicle entered the zone. Once that factual finding was made, the legal analysis followed automatically.

Practical Lessons for Drivers

This case carries some clear and important messages for anyone who regularly drives in London or other urban areas with vehicle restriction zones.

• Switching off your engine does not help. If a road is prohibited to motor vehicles, your car, van, or motorcycle is still a motor vehicle whether the engine is running or not. Pushing, towing, or coasting through will not avoid the contravention.
• Read the Traffic Management Order, not just the sign. Signs tell you what is prohibited. The TMO tells you exactly how the contravention is defined. In many cases — as here — the wording is broader than drivers expect. "Causing or permitting" a vehicle to enter catches a far wider range of behaviour than simply driving.
• Plan your route before you enter, not after. Delivery drivers in particular need to be aware of vehicle restriction zones on their routes. If a road is restricted, the answer is to find an alternative route — not to find a creative way through.
• Mitigation is not the same as a defence. If you appeal a PCN, be clear about what you are actually arguing. Explaining that you had a good reason for doing something is very different from arguing that you did not commit the contravention. Tribunals can only act on the latter.
• CCTV is increasingly decisive. In restriction zone cases, councils routinely submit CCTV footage. If the footage shows your vehicle in the zone, you will need a very specific legal argument — not just a sympathetic story — to succeed on appeal.

The Key Takeaway

If a road is closed to your type of vehicle, there is no clever workaround. Turning off your engine, being pushed, being towed — none of it matters. The law catches the vehicle entering the zone, not the manner in which it got there. The only safe approach is to avoid the restricted road entirely.

This case is a reminder that parking and traffic law is often far more precise — and far less forgiving — than common sense might suggest. Before you assume you have found a loophole, it is worth asking whether the law was written to close exactly that gap. In this instance, it was.