A furious funeral home director took on Transport for London (TfL) and won after he was incorrectly slapped with a £90 ULEZ fine.

Alex Whitmey was stunned to receive the charge because he’d checked his new £52,000 F-type Jaguar was compliant before entering the controversial zone.

Ironically, the 58-year-old partly paid for the car with pension money he’d received from TfL, where he used to work as a fraud investigator.

Now in charge of Sittingbourne-based William Whitmey Independent Funeral Directors, he explained how he checked the ULEZ website on November 17 before driving to Orpington.

The zone, which was expanded by London Mayor Sadiq Khan last year, targets polluting vehicles with a £12.50 daily fee as they enter the capital.

The site said Mr Whitmey could travel without paying as his vehicle was compliant with the set environmental standards.

However, the motoring misunderstanding came about because Mr Whitmey had swapped the personalised registration plate from his old X-type Jag to his new one.

Although the website had been updated to show the new car’s details, the technology used for fines had not been - meaning TfL thought the old vehicle had entered the zone.

On November 28, the businessman was “shocked” to receive a £90 bill and was threatened this would rise to £270 if not resolved before Christmas Eve.

He and wife Nadine rechecked the website, which confirmed the Jag was compliant, and sent a screenshot of the page as part of their appeal.

It was not until 9am on December 18, that a TfL reply reached them asking for more in-depth information - including a letter from Jaguar.

Mr Whitmey said: “I checked on their own website putting in my car details and it clearly states ‘This vehicle meets the ULEZ emissions standards, you do not need to pay a daily ULEZ charge’.

“But they demanded a letter from the vehicle’s makers, a copy of my four-page logbook and a copy of the vehicle’s compliance certificate.

“It is utter madness. It’s not about the money it’s the principle.

“I could have understood if they admitted their own website was not fit for purpose but they just dug their heels in and asked me to jump through all these hoops.”

Frustrated by the arduous task set them, Mrs Whitmey decided to call up TfL headquarters.

She said: “I explained the website said we were compliant but was told I needed to send all of this information to them within 14 days of the date of the letter.

“This would be impractical, especially given we were so close to Christmas and there were going to be third parties involved and I was reliant on them getting the information to me.

“Unfortunately, this did not make the slightest difference.”

However, at around 4.30pm on the day they received the letter, the couple got a notification that the penalty had been rescinded.

A TfL spokesman told KentOnline: “We are sorry Mr Whitmey incorrectly received ULEZ penalty charges when his vehicle is compliant.

“We have cancelled all fines and we are contacting him to apologise for the distress this has caused.”

The agency explained there is a four-week gap from when DVLA registers a vehicle to when its compliance section receives it.

But still annoyed by the car confusion, Mr Whitmey says his case could be one of hundreds and TfL needs to “look it into its system”.

He added: “How many other people out there get fined and just pay when their vehicle is compliant?

“Furthermore, if the website can send fines to people who have compliant cars, there are bound to be cars out there that are not compliant but not being charged.

“We are expecting some form of compensation.”