Showing posts with label credit card surcharge. Show all posts
Showing posts with label credit card surcharge. Show all posts

Sunday, February 14, 2010

Seems that some councils just cannot help themselves ...

Despite the fact that the Operational Guidance to Local Authorities states:

10.17 Paying by online debit and credit cards is convenient for many motorists and is more secure for local authorities. The electronic card readers automatically seeks authorisation for values previously agreed between the card holder and the card company, and automatically bars any ‘blacklisted’ cards. Auditors favour the use of online debit and credit cards to avoid creating bad debts and minimising collection costs. There are operational savings to debit/credit cards so authorities cannot justify applying surcharges for their use.




Some councils just cannot help themselves.
Here we have a PCN from Staffordshire Borough Council which has a '1.6% levy' on all credit card payments.

The Chief Executive has been put on notice that this renders the PCN void and unenforceable.

Anyone with a PCN from Staffordshire Borough Council simply needs to tick the box 'The PCN exceeded the prescribed amount.'

The Motorists Legal Challenge will take up the case should the council refuse to cancel the PCN.

Friday, September 25, 2009

'Credit card surcharge makes parking tickets illegal and refundable'

Express & Echo
21 September 2009

MOTORISTS in Devon who have received parking tickets could be eligible for a refund after a surcharge on payment by credit card was deemed illegal.

Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) that were being issued by Teignbridge District Council stated that the recipient would incur a 1.7 per cent administration charge if it was paid by credit card.
However, this meant the penalty exceeded the amount prescribed by law and rendered the notices unlawful.

Dawlish resident and long-time parking campaigner Peter Harry fell victim to the extra charges and brought it to the attention of Neil Herron, who runs a business called Parking Appeals.
Following the revelation, a spokesman for Teignbridge Council said it had stopped making the charge on August 13 this year “as soon as we were made aware of a decision relating to another authority’s charges”.

A freedom of information request asking when the surcharge was introduced, the total number of penalty notices issued and the income derived from them has now been submitted to the district council.

The spokesman said: “The small credit card surcharge on PCNs was applied in good faith, and in common with many authorities and businesses.”

Mr Herron has urged everyone who has been issued with a ticket since the surcharge was introduced to apply for a refund.

He said: “Councils are not permitted to charge a surcharge for parking fines and if they do then the motorist is entitled to his money back.
“This is the first case we are aware of in Devon but four boroughs in London we took to task issued £19.4m worth of parking tickets this way over a period extending from six months to two years.
“All monies must be refunded where the charge was applied whether the recipient paid by credit card or not, as it is the PCN that is unlawful.”


Mr Harry added that the tickets being issued by Teignbridge District Council at present were still invalid.
He said: “I purposely got another ticket after they said it had been withdrawn and all the council seems to have done is used a black felt tip pen to cross off the information about the surcharge on the notice.
“It is a legal document and they can not just tamper with it. If you are named on a will you can not cross someone’s name out with a black pen.
“Until they issue a new stock, all penalty charge notices that are given out will continue to be unlawful.”



Saturday, August 22, 2009

Credit-card surcharges for parking tickets to be reimbursed

Town halls across Britain are bracing themselves for an inundation of claims by motorists demanding reimbursement of money they were wrongfully charged for paying for a parking ticket by credit card.
[ClickPress, Thu Aug 13 2009]

In a test case in which a London motorist challenged the 1.3% surcharge in Camden, his claim was upheld by the adjudicator (the Parking and Traffic Appeals Service), which said that such surcharges are unlawful and councils could not demand money in addition to the fine for the offence itself.

This ruling applies to all fines set by local authorities, including those outside London which have been given the right to monitor parking offences and keep the fines. This ruling opens the way for millions of drivers who have used a credit card for paying a parking fine to claim reimbursement.

If councils choose not to issue refunds to all those entitled to one, they may face a class action launched by the motorists’ campaign group Parking Appeals.

Neil Herron, a spokesman for the group, said that the surcharges were simply a case of greed on the part of councils “trying to extract every last drop of cash from the motorist”.

A spokesman for the AA also attacked the credit card charges, calling them “outrageous” and a demonstration of “the extent to which councils have been acting as a law unto themselves”.

Peter Roberts, chief executive of the Drivers’ Alliance, welcomed the ruling on the test case. “Councils are taking motorists for a ride with countless stealth taxes and petty fines,” he said, and called on “every council [to] return the illegal charges without delay”.

A government spokesman from the Department of Transport added his voice too to the chorus of critics, saying that “Parking charges should be used to manage demand and not to raise revenue.”

What makes the charges all the more indefensible is that paying parking fines by debit and credit cards is actually much cheaper and more secure for local authorities than processing cheques or dealing with cash brought into a parking shop.

Following the ruling, Camden Council has scrapped its policy of levying an extra fee for processing payments made by credit card, a “goodwill move” which it is applying across all council services, not just on parking fines. It said that processing bills through credit cards was costing the authority some £250,000 a year, costs which the charge was intended to cover.

For press enquiries, please contact Peter Cooper on 020 7183 7247
Email: info@247parking.com Web: http://www.247parking.com/

News provided by 24 7 Parking Ltd, a leading marketing services provider to the car parking industry in the UK, and a leading de facto marketplace for buyers and sellers, or lessees and lessors, of car parking spaces. 24 7 Parking carries out daily surveys of the national media to provide up-to-date news and commentary on UK transport.



Friday, August 14, 2009

Loophole in parking fines: Thousands of pounds could be refunded

Evening Courier
14 August 2009
By Michael Peel

CALDERDALE Council might be forced to pay back thousands of pounds in parking fines because of a legal loophole.
It has been putting a 2.6 per cent surcharge on credit card payments, which is against Department for Transport guidelines.

Car parking campaigner Neil Herron, director of Parking Appeals Ltd has raised the issue with Calderdale Council. "If the council has made a mistake, like several others, they should hold their hands up and waive the entire charge."
Tyne and Wear-based Mr Herron, whose company threatened to take another council to the High Court over the issue, said he has written to the council's chief executive Owen Williams.
He wants to find out how many motorists have paid up and how much might have to be refunded.
Mr Herron also wants the issuing of parking fines to be suspended until references to credit card surcharges are removed from all paperwork, notices and the council's website.
The Parking and Traffic Appeals Service adjudicator Michael Greenslade ruled earlier this year that parking tickets issued by Camden Council were invalid if they had a credit card surcharge added.
In June, Mr Herron threatened to take Harrow Council to the High Court if it did not pay back all fines paid by credit card since September 2007.
"We have found about a dozen councils, including Calderdale, which appear to be charging people more than the penalty prescribed by law," said Mr Herron.
Harrow Council suspended its 1.5 per cent credit card surcharge on parking fines but insisted it was nonsense that it should pay back all tickets paid by credit card since September 2007 and is consulting lawyers.

Guidelines issued by the Department of Transport on the Traffic Management Act 2004, which governs parking fines state: "There are operational savings to debit/credit cards so authorities cannot justify applying surcharges for their use."

Calderdale's head of engineering Martin Hibbins said: "We are aware of the recent ruling and can confirm that we no longer apply a credit-card surcharge for the payment of parking fines.

"Our online payment system has already been updated to ensure that no credit-card surcharge is applied, and the relevant wording on the council website is being changed accordingly."




Monday, August 10, 2009

More refunds for Britain's motorists ... have you paid your parking fine by credit card?

Register with us at http://www.parkingappeals.co.uk/ in order to support the campaign to expose lawless councils.
All profits go to support the various legal actions.
Check out http://www.motoristslegalchallenge.co.uk/ and see how we are prepared to be the David that takes on Goliath.

Meanwhile, our latest victory for Britain's motorists is reported in the Daily Telegraph.

Motorists set to recoup parking fines after credit card challenge

Motorists who have paid millions of pounds in parking fines are in line for refunds after a test case ruled that town hall surcharges imposed for paying by credit card are unlawful.

By David Millward, Transport Editor
Published: 9:00PM BST 10 Aug 2009

An estimated eight million drivers, around one in four of the total number on the roads, receive a parking ticket every year, paying an estimated £1 billion in fines.
Millions choose to use a credit card to settle the debt either by paying online or via a telephone service.

Related Articles
A mess over illegal parking tickets
Councils to use cameras to catch drivers
Illegal parking fines cost drivers millions
Motorists see £12.5m increase in parking fines
How to get revenge for your parking ticket

At least a dozen councils across the country are known to have imposed surcharges on motorists who do so, although campaigners believe the number is likely to be higher.

They include several London boroughs, including Camden - the council at the heart of the test case - and authorities from Calderdale in West Yorkshire to Wealden, in East Sussex.
But the practice of imposing the additional surcharge on drivers was challenged by a motorist in London.

His case, which challenged the 1.3 per cent surcharge in Camden, was upheld by the adjudicator.
The ruling applies to all fines imposed by local authorities including those outside the capital which have been given the right to police parking and keep the fines.
It also applies to fines imposed by councils for ‘moving motoring offences’, such as entering a box junction.

The adjudicator said councils could not demand money in addition to the fine for the offence itself.

Town halls were not, the adjudicator added, in the same position as commercial enterprises which were free to negotiate or impose additional fees on their customers.
As a result of the ruling councils which have imposed the illegal surcharges face an avalanche of claims from motorists.

Neil Herron of the motorists’ campaign group Parking Appeals, said he was ready to launch a class action to force town halls to reimburse motorists if they fail to do so voluntarily.
“Yet again we have exposed councils acting unlawfully in their pursuit of the motorist. Councils have a duty to act within the law at all times and yet again their greed, by trying to extract every last drop of cash from the motorist, is going to come back and bite them.
“In this instance they can have no excuses. The legislation is explicitly clear,” he said.
“The process of refunding motorists the full amount could not be simpler. After all they have all the details of the person who paid and, they will not be allowed to keep unlawfully derived income.
“If any council decides not to refund we are quite prepared to launch a class action on behalf of those fined unlawfully.”


An AA spokesman said: “These credit card charges have been outrageous. Councils have got their fingers burned and have been caught acting illegally. It shows the extent to which councils have been acting as a law unto themselves.
“Paying by credit card gives drivers at least some protection against fraud when paying on line. Also using the internet saves councils a fortune, compared to processing cheques or handling fistfuls of cash being brought into a parking shop.
“We expect councils across the country to stop these surcharges straight away of face thousands of appeals.”


The ruling was also welcomed by Peter Roberts, chief executive of the Drivers’ Alliance. “Councils are taking motorists for a ride with countless stealth taxes and petty fines,” he said.
“It is not before time their dubious activities have been challenged and every council must return the illegal charges without delay. The wheels are falling off the councils stealthy bandwagon and not before time.”


The Department for Transport also refused to defend councils which impose the additional levy on motorists.
“Parking charges should be used to manage demand and not to raise revenue,” a spokesman said.
“Our guidance to councils is clear that paying by debit and credit cards is more convenient for many motorists and is cheaper and more secure for local authorities so surcharges for such payments cannot be justified.”

A spokesman for London Councils declined to comment on the Camden case, saying it was up to individual authorities to deal with the ruling.

Meanwhile a spokesman for the Local Government Association, added:"Both local authorities and motorists should abide by the law. In this case, members of the public may question whether it is fair that they as council tax payers should bear the cost of collecting money from people who have broken the law but decided to pay their fine by credit card. Councils will be considering the implications of this decision."



Sunday, August 09, 2009

Another victory as Camden caves in ... but beware the smokescreen

Please try and keep a straight face when you read that Camden had decided to refund credit card surcharges across all council services "as a goodwill move."
Is it the fear of litigation that has brought about this change of heart?

Harrow, Merton and Kingston are set to follow suit.



Perhaps councils will start to understand that they too must respect the law. After years of fining motorists for the most minor of contraventions and using parking enforcement as a stealth tax it now seems that those days are not only numbered but likely to come with a very heavy price indeed.

We will shortly be revealing which councils outside of London are set for a nasty shock as they too fall foul of just wanting a little too much blood.
If you have had a ticket and want to be kept updated then drop us an e-mail at enquiries@parkingappeals.co.uk and title it refunds. You can support what we do at www.parkingappeals.co.uk or www.motoristslegalchallenge.co.uk

Council to repay credit card levy
BBC 9th August 2009

Camden Council in London has scrapped a policy only introduced in January of levying an extra fee to taxpayers for processing money paid by credit card.
The move follows a ruling by an appeals body that applying a card surcharge made an entire parking fine unlawful.

The council said it was still looking at that ruling but meanwhile was abandoning the handling fee across all council services as a "goodwill move".
Parking fee lobby group Parking Appeals said the move was a "smokescreen".

The council said processing bills through credit cards was costing the authority about £250,000 a year and the charge had been introduced to recover those costs.
"This fee has now been suspended across all council services, and those people who have paid a credit card charge may apply for a refund," the council said.

'Legal action'
The council has given out £26m in parking fines this year and stopped levying the credit card handling fee after the ruling by the Parking and Traffic Appeals Service.
The authority says it is still considering what to do about that decision but has meanwhile stopped levying the credit card charge across all its services, not just on parking fines.

Neil Herron, from pressure group Parking Appeals, claimed the move was a "smokescreen to cover their actions".
"I hope the council do not think that by refunding the credit card surcharge across all its council services they will avoid repaying the entire parking fines to the thousands of motorists who have been unlawfully penalised," he said.
"The entire fines have been ruled unlawful, not just the surcharges for paying by credit card.
"If they do not abide by the appeal tribunal ruling, we will not hesitate to take legal action."

A council spokesman said the authority was expected to decide within a fortnight what action to take following the appeal panel's decision, which was handed down in June.

The ruling could also affect many other boroughs, including Harrow, Merton and Kingston, which had also charged extra to pay tickets by credit card.




Sunday, July 19, 2009

A new peasant's revolt ... or justice on the horizon for the motorist?



How to get revenge for your parking ticket
You can turn the tables on councils that play fast and loose with the law, says Philip Johnston
Published 19 Jul 2009
Daily Telegraph

Yes, I know: it's only a parking ticket. Perhaps I should not be in such a lather about it, but I am and I am not alone. Not by a long way. It is not that we cannot afford £60 (or £30 if we go quietly, which we won't). It is the sheer injustice of it.
This ticket was placed on our car not in the town centre or on a busy urban highway but in the street outside our house where we already pay £90 a year to park in a Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ), which a majority in our road voted against having in a referendum. We live in a quiet avenue in London with no problems of congestion or of obstruction.

Related Articles
A mess over illegal parking tickets

But the borough painted a confusing array of white and yellow lines everywhere, removing around a dozen spaces where cars used to be able to park. Near our home, the bay is so badly drawn that, in order not to obstruct a neighbour's access, we parked a few feet over the line, as everyone does and we have done many times.

A ticket was issued. We appealed to the local borough and they said: "We must advise that when using parking bays you must make sure your car is fully within the parking bay or space before you leave it. If it is beyond the end of a bay, straddling two bays or obstructing the clearway you may get a ticket even if you have paid to park, or have a valid permit allowing you to park."

When we pointed out that the lines were not easy to discern, and that if we parked within the lines the car would block a neighbour's access, we were told that "the law does not require that the yellow line must be in good condition. Enforcement can take place as long as the signage reasonably indicates a restriction".

It was this mention of the law that made me sit up. If they are going to quote the law at us, we will try to find out if they are observing it as well. If they are going to quibble about our car being a foot over an arbitrarily drawn line, let's see whether, in the myriad parking regulations, there is a legislative equivalent that we can irritate the life out of them with. If people are to be fined simply because their ticket has fallen off the windscreen, maybe the tables can be turned; and I know a man who can do turn them.

Neil Herron is a sort of latter day Wat Tyler leading a Peasant's Revolt against the parking tyranny that has gripped the land. A former fishmonger from Sunderland, he was a key figure in the celebrated Metric Martyr campaign a few years ago when his late friend Steve Thoburn, a fellow market stallholder, was fined for selling bananas by the pound. He has a sharp sense of injustice and now runs ParkingAppeals.co.uk, which specialises in fighting such cases – and winning them, too.

In fact, he is causing consternation in town halls across the land. In our case, Mr Herron advised that the CPZ may itself be illegal since it does not appear to have been correctly signposted. This could be true of residential parking zones around the country and he has a judicial review under way in which the Government is taking a direct interest because the implications are considerable: if CPZs are invalidated then millions of pounds in penalties may have to be returned.

Were this to happen, councils would have only themselves to blame. They simply became too greedy. CPZs were supposed to cover small areas of around 12 or so streets where there are legitimate parking worries, but they have spread across whole towns because they raise money. Parking has become a stealth tax. A fine is a punishment yet it is levied not through the criminal justice system but by way of a civil regime administered by local councils, many of whom seem not to think it matters whether they obey the regulations or not.

Last year in England, nearly four million tickets were issued, 250,000 more than in 2007 and a fivefold increase since 2001, the year when the decriminalised system (which has operated in London since the mid-1990s) began to spread across the country.

Thanks to Mr Herron, we have now discovered that the ticket we received is almost certainly invalid. Our borough, in common with several others, was making an additional charge for processing credit card payments. This has recently been ruled unlawful by the parking adjudicator because it adds an extra sum to what is a statutory penalty. The charge has been withdrawn; but our ticket was issued when it was still in place, which at least gives us something to argue with.

In the three months that our council operated this illegal scheme it issued tickets to the value of £500,000. These may have to be refunded. Other boroughs face paying back millions.
It serves them right – but in the end, of course, it will be the council taxpayer that suffers, so we will pay anyway. It should come out of the pockets of the people who played so fast and loose with the laws they expect the rest of us to follow.


Blog Archive


only search Neil Herron Blog