Free Traffic Legal Advice

This happened today. I parked in the paid parking space shown in the google maps link. I had never parked in Islington before, so I asked a nearby Civil Enforcement Officer for assistance. She said to get the Ringgo app and enter the 61336 location number. I never had the app before, either. I don't use any phone or app paid parking things, other than normal pay and display machines, so I have no idea what is meant to happen when you use them. I downloaded the app, but it could not find the location, The CEO was still with me so I asked her to try and get the app to work, and she couldn't do it. (I have screenshots of this) Once this failed I rang the phone number to do it that way instead. I had to verbally give the reg number, make of car, and colour of car to Ringgo, presumably so that Ringgo could confirm the reg plate was correct. I then thought it repeated what I had said back correctly. Red Toyota GK18 XXF. Now I know it said GK18 XXS. I recorded the call after the fact to demonstrate that it is difficult to tell whether the automated voice says XXF or XXS. Also, the road was incredibly windy at the time, and there was also a loud event happening in Smithfield Market with huge speaker system set up, both of these made it really hard to hear. The automated voice then confirmed that the reg plate matched the car type and colour. It turns out the car GK18 XXS is the exact same as mine (make model colour), so the form of verification that Ringgo uses on reg numbers failed in these circumstances. I then used my credit card to pay for the hour parking. £9.67 for an hour. Once it confirmed the parking had been successfully paid it hung up. I then rang the same number again, where it tells you; that you have already paid for Cowcross Street parking for your red Toyota car reg ending XXS, and would you like to extend the paid session. Again, it read the number plate in the exact same automated voice as before. Again, the voice does not pronounce S clearly enough for me to tell that it has not understood my voice when I told it the correct reg number.

The confirmation email arrived long after I had left the car, since as not expecting one I did not know to check it. I wasn't expecting it because I have never used this type of pay for parking set-up before, so I did not know what to expect.

When I got back I found a PCN for 11-Parked without payment of the parking charge.

---

Map:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/K9h7Sf6VFj1s52YT6

---

The PCN:
https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/bpx5k3f_xl.jpg

---

---

The email confirming parking that arrived long after I had left the area:
https://cdn.imgpile.com/f/3iIe9QA_xl.jpg

---

Thank you for the reply. I have submitted an appeal on the basis that the contravention did not occur (text below). Strangely, Islington do not seem to let you do informal appeals? The only button on the website says to make a "Challenge", which presumably is a formal appeal. It says on the back of the ticket that they will restart the 14 days reduced amount if the appeal fails, but the page on the council website does not seem to make that clear: https://www.islington.gov.uk/parking/parking-tickets/challenge-a-penalty-charge-notice

---

I am writing to challenge the above Penalty Charge Notice on the ground that the contravention did not occur.

On the date in question, I parked in a paid parking bay on Cowcross Street. This was my first time parking in Islington, and I was unfamiliar with the RingGo system. I asked a nearby Civil Enforcement Officer for help, who advised me to use the RingGo app and location number 61336. I downloaded the app, but it would not find the location. The officer remained with me and also attempted to use the app, but it did not work. I have screenshots showing this.

I therefore paid by telephone using the RingGo automated service. I verbally gave my vehicle registration as GK18 XXF, along with the make and colour (red Toyota). Due to very windy conditions and a loud event nearby at Smithfield Market, it was difficult to hear the automated voice clearly. The system repeated the registration back to me and confirmed that it matched the vehicle make and colour, so I believed it had been entered correctly.

I later discovered that the system had recorded the registration as GK18 XXS rather than XXF. The vehicle with registration GK18 XXS is the same make, model, and colour as mine, meaning RingGo’s verification process did not identify the error. This was very bad luck, what are the chances? I paid £9.67 for one hour of parking and received confirmation that payment had been successful. When I called the service again, it confirmed that parking was already paid for at that location.

I genuinely believed I had paid correctly and had taken reasonable steps to comply, including seeking assistance from a Civil Enforcement Officer and completing payment before leaving the vehicle. The confirmation email arrived after I had left, and as this was my first time using this system, I was not aware to check for it.

As payment was made for the relevant time and location, I submit that the alleged contravention did not occur. Furthermore, the council is not out of pocket for the parking space since I did pay for the space I took up. I am attaching the receipt for the payment. I can provide more supporting evidence including, more screenshots, and a recording demonstrating the difficulty in distinguishing the automated pronunciation of the final letter of the registration.

I respectfully request that the Penalty Charge Notice be cancelled.

Yours faithfully,

Yes, I did it once I got back to the car, and saw the ticket.

The case below suggests you could lose this at adjudication but some adjudicators are more sympathetic to issues with pay by phone and also they can make non-binding recommendations to cancel.

We are seeing councils increasingly not using discretion for trivial errors that do not disadvantage them and playing it only by what their traffic orders say - I'll try and check the order.

I would be inclined to take it to NTO stage and have a good go at holding them the statutory guidance to act fairly.

See what others say.

--------

Case reference   2250461403
Appellant   xxxxxxx
Authority   London Borough of Bromley
VRM   AK16MRY
   
PCN Details
PCN   BY23274278
Contravention date   29 May 2025
Contravention time   12:02:00
Contravention location   High Street
Penalty amount   GBP 90.00
Contravention   Parked without payment of the parking charge
   
Referral date   -
   
Decision Date   14 Jan 2026
Adjudicator   Philippa Alderson
Appeal decision   Appeal refused
Direction   Full penalty charge notice amount stated to be paid within 28 days.
1.   Reasons   The Appellant is appealing a PCN issued in respect of parking without payment of the parking charge.
2.   The Council relies upon the contemporaneous evidence of the Civil Enforcement Officer, a copy of the PCN, map/site report, a copy of the relevant legislation and correspondence.
3.   The Appellant contends that she parked and used the relevant phone number to access the parking system. She contends that the registration details held by the relevant system have recorded her vehicle's details as AK16NRY, not the correct details of AK16MRY. She has experienced this problem in the past and concludes that she must not have changed the details held by the system used in Bromley. She further contends that, when "logging in" by phone, there is always background noise and also that the sound of the computer voice makes an "N" sound very much like an "M". She contends that it is unfair to be penalised, when she had in fact made payment. She further contends that a CEO told her that the PCN would be cancelled if she sent in the payment receipt.
4.   I have carefully considered all the evidence in this matter
5.   The CEO’s photographs show the vehicle parked and unattended at the location. No record of payment being found in respect of the vehicle, by reference to its registration details, a PCN was issued.
6.   Whilst I accept that the Appellant made a payment to park, the circumstances described by her amount to mitigation only, which the Court of Appeal has made clear I may not take into account. They do not afford her a ground of appeal. It is incumbent upon drivers to make payment in respect of a specific vehicle, to enter the details of that vehicle correctly, and to ensure that any amendments to a vehicle's details have been made prior to relying upon the system.
7.   I have not had sight of the CEO's bodycam footage, but in any a CEO has no authority to assure a driver that a PCN will be cancelled.
8.   I am satisfied to the requisite standard that a contravention has taken place and that no statutory ground of appeal or exemption has been established.
9.   I must therefore refuse this appeal.