How councils reject parking ticket appeals — even if you have done nothing wrong
EVERY time Valerie Jacobs visits her brother in North London she pops a note on her car dashboard that says: ‘Collecting carers’ parking permit. Back in one minute.’
She does this so that passing parking wardens don’t issue a ticket while she runs up to her brother’s flat to grab the permit that she shares with his two other carers.
But in January the retired British Red Cross worker returned to her blue Nissan with the permit to discover a £110 fine stuck to her window screen.
Valerie, who is in her 70s, wrote to Barnet Council to explain the situation. But it refused to waive the fine.
Barnet Council said it ‘empathised with the circumstances’, but that it did not merit the cancellation of the penalty charge notice (PCN).
The council added that if she paid within 14 days it would cost her only £55. If she appealed again and lost, the full £110 would be due. So, Valerie gave in and paid the fine.
Valerie’s parking fine is one of around nine million that local authorities issue every year. They are a major source of revenue for councils, raking in hundreds of millions of pounds.
Some penalties are issued for legitimate offences, such as parking on a red route or zig-zag lines.
But tens of thousands of fines are unfairly handed out to honest drivers who have been caught out by broken payment machines, confusing signs or misleading road markings.
And the worst part is that when motorists appeal to councils, their complaints are typically thrown out.
In some cases, appeals are being rejected even though drivers had bought a valid ticket or paid for a permit. Others have had challenges refused for errors that were out of their control.
In one case, a driver’s appeal was rejected even though the automated payment service wrongly recorded their registration number when they called to pay.
When motorists have their initial appeal rejected they are often then too busy or scared to take it further. Many fear they’ll have to pay even more or attend an intimidating court hearing. Yet figures show that of the tiny proportion of drivers — just one in 100 — who take their appeal all the way to the adjudicator, half are successful.
Joshua Browder, founder of the fine-fighting website DoNotPay. co. uk, says: ‘ Councils have a tendency to fine first and ask questions later. And too often they’ll ignore mitigating circumstances that deserve leniency.’ Mr Browder says that of the 1,000 drivers who visit his website every day for help disputing tickets, 600 are successful. And since launching the site three years ago, he’s won 250,000 appeals.
He says the most common reason for appealing a fine is incorrect signage. For example, a tree may be blocking a sign or there may be two conflicting signs close together. In some cases, the bay may even be too small to park a car in.
The next most common reason is a genuine error, such as noting the wrong time on a disabled Blue Badge.
A Barnet Council spokesman says of Ms Jacobs’ case: ‘We make every effort to accommodate the needs of carers with permits, but to date the motorist has not provided evidence that they hold one.’
When Karen Bottrill visited Leeds for a training course in November, she paid £8.50 to park her black Peugeot 107 for the day.
The 62-year-old special education needs co- ordinator didn’t have enough in coins and the machine wouldn’t accept notes. So, she
called the number on the machine for Parkmobile to pay by card over the phone.
A text arrived to say her payment had been accepted and that she had the space until 9.59pm.
Yet when Karen returned to her car at around 6pm, she found a ticket on her window screen.
Worried the fine would increase from £25 to £50, Karen paid first and then tried to appeal.
But Leeds City Council replied saying the registration number she had given did not match the one on the penalty notice issued.
It emerged the Parkmobile automated voice recorder had heard the final letter as ‘S’ instead of ‘F’. Karen says the council refused to discuss the case because her details didn’t match those they had on record.
Karen, who lives with her husband Neil, 60, in Wakefield, West York- shire, says: ‘I’ve hit a brick wall. It’s not my fault the number was noted down wrong. Yet I’ve had to pay twice — for the parking ticket and the fine. They just want all the money they can get.’
A spokesman for Leeds City Council has since admitted an admin mistake had been made and refunded the ticket.
Alan and Kathleen Lomax also believe they were charged unfairly for events out of their control.
The retired couple were visiting Bakewell, Derbyshire, for the day, and parked their blue Ford Fiesta in a car park adjacent to the agricultural showground.
When they went to pay at the machine, the coins were rejected and a message ‘not in use’ flashed up on the screen.
It was the second broken machine the couple had come across that day, so they thought the entire system was down. There were no parking wardens around to ask, so the retired couple from Chadderton, Greater Manchester, left the car and went for lunch in a nearby cafe.
As they finished their drinks, they noticed a parking inspector by their vehicle, issuing a ticket.
They dashed down to explain the machine wasn’t working, but he said that once he had started writing a ticket he couldn’t stop.
The ticket said the fine was £25 if paid within 14 days after which it would rise to £50.
Alan, who previously ran a transport consultancy business, intended to appeal, but was worried the fine might increase.
So he posted a cheque to Derbyshire Dales District Council for £25 with a letter stating he was not accepting liability by paying and would be contesting the fine. But when he tried to appeal, Alan says he was told the case was closed because he had paid.
‘It seems very unfair,’ says Alan. ‘But then it’s a nice bit of extra income for them, isn’t it?’
A Derbyshire Dales District Council spokesman disputes Mr Lomax’s version of events.
He says: ‘Mr Lomax’s challenge was rejected because he did not make a reasonable attempt to pay at an alternative machine — he tried only one of five.
‘Civil enforcement officers can’t negotiate with car park users — it is not their job to decide if individuals have a valid reason for not displaying a ticket.’
Barrie Segal, founder of ParkingTicketExpert.com and AppealNow.com, says: ‘ Parking fines are a lucrative business.
‘Many councils have contracts with private companies that issue fines on their behalf and firms fight hard to win these deals.’
HE SAYS that civil enforcement officers are pressured to issue 2.8 fines per hour. ‘That’s around 22 during an eighthour shift, which at up to £130 a pop is a lot of money.’
The 353 local authorities in England raked in a £756 million profit from parking charges in the year ending April 2016 — a 9 pc increase on the previous year, says the RAC Foundation.
London accounted for almost half of this, with its 33 boroughs making £332 million in total.
This is because fines in the capital are higher — at up to £130 — than elsewhere, where charges rarely go above £70.
Andrew Pester, interim chief executive of the British Parking Association, says there are strict rules laid down by law that stipulate how councils spend money from parking fines.
It typically goes towards improving traffic management and transport services in the local area.
‘Civil enforcement officers, when serving penalty charge notices, can’t know all the circumstances and that’s why appeals are so important in ensuring that parking enforcement is undertaken fairly,’ he says.
HAD a parking appeal turned down? Write to Money Mail, 2 Derry Street, London W8 5TT or money.mail@dailymail.co.uk