Sir Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, has been convicted and fined through a fast-track magistrate's court after authorities accused him of failing to tax a 24-year-old Nissan Micra. The Labour politician, 55, was found guilty by magistrate Surinder Gidda in Herefordshire Magistrates' Court on 18 August of keeping an unlicensed vehicle in a criminal prosecution brought by the DVLA. Khan's team has rejected the conviction, describing the situation as a scam orchestrated against the mayor.
Officials at City Hall stated categorically that the vehicle in question did not belong to either Khan or Transport for London (TfL). A spokesperson for the mayor said:
This is a scam, which is a crime. It's not the first time the mayor has been victim of a scam involving people falsely stating that Sadiq is the owner of a vehicle. Such behaviour is illegal, and the DVLA are aware.
The conviction stems from a blue Nissan Micra first registered in 2002. According to reporting on the case, the vehicle's annual tax expired in September 2025, and the DVLA identified it as untaxed on 24 January. The agency told the court that Khan's name and date of birth appeared in government records linked to the car, prompting the prosecution to proceed.
A significant procedural error complicated the case. Court documents reveal that DVLA correspondence addressed to Khan regarding the unpaid tax bill was sent to Gordon Ramsay's east London restaurant rather than the nearby TfL offices. When a letter requesting confirmation of the vehicle owner's identity went unanswered in January—unsurprising given it arrived at the wrong address—the DVLA pursued criminal prosecution.
The magistrate convicted Khan in his absence during a private hearing under the Single Justice Procedure and imposed financial penalties totalling £340.84. This comprised a £220 fine, £85 in costs, and the £35.84 outstanding tax bill on the Micra. The court record was also sent to the Gordon Ramsay restaurant, ordering Khan to settle the bill within 28 days or face escalated enforcement action including potential bailiff involvement or arrest warrant.
How did Khan end up on the vehicle register?
The circumstances surrounding Khan's name appearing on the DVLA records remain unclear, but the conviction has prompted immediate scrutiny. According to ITV's reporting, the situation may be connected to a wave of protests that followed Khan's expansion of the Ultra Low Emission Zone (Ulez) to cover the whole of London. After the mayor implemented the £12.50 daily charge, motorists opposed to the policy discussed registering vehicles in Khan's name as a form of protest, supposedly to make him liable for the fees.
The mayor's adviser told a national broadcaster that the DVLA was
urgentlylooking into reopening the case with a view to withdrawing the prosecution. The DVLA confirmed it would also investigate the false registration that placed Khan's details on the vehicle record.
What are Khan's options for challenging the conviction?
Defendants who believe they have been wrongly convicted in their absence can apply to have the case reopened, typically by appearing in person before a judge to make a statutory declaration. Khan could argue that he remained unaware of the criminal proceedings because official correspondence was misdirected to the wrong building. Once the case is reopened, he could petition the DVLA to withdraw the prosecution if it can be demonstrated that he was wrongly accused, or he could enter a not guilty plea. Alternatively, the DVLA itself could apply to the court for the case to be reopened.
What happens next?
The DVLA's ongoing review of the case may result in the prosecution being withdrawn, according to recent reporting. The agency has confirmed it is investigating both the circumstances of the prosecution and the false registration that led to Khan's name being linked to the vehicle. The outcome of this review could determine whether the conviction stands or is set aside.
Key Facts
- Khan was convicted on 18 August in Herefordshire Magistrates' Court of keeping an unlicensed vehicle and ordered to pay £340.84 in fines, costs, and unpaid tax
- DVLA correspondence about the vehicle was sent to a Gordon Ramsay restaurant instead of Transport for London offices, preventing Khan from receiving notice of the case
- City Hall officials deny Khan or TfL owned the vehicle, suggesting his name was fraudulently registered following protests against the Ulez expansion
- The DVLA is reviewing the case and investigating the false registration, with potential for the prosecution to be withdrawn
- Khan can apply to have the conviction reopened by making a statutory declaration to a judge, citing the misdirected correspondence as grounds for his absence from the hearing
