A controversial new parking ticket system is bringing in more than triple the fines of the average warden, but a Lower Hutt man says drivers are being used as “guinea pigs”.
Hutt City Council has received a flood of appeals over its licence plate recognition (LPR) system after a printing error meant multiple people were sent tickets accusing them of “impossible” parking offences.
Bewildered drivers told the council they could not have committed a parking offence when their tickets said they did, because they were out of town or even out of the country on those days.
Others said their tickets stated they had parked without paying in the early hours of the morning when they were asleep, or when they had proof their vehicle was at the mechanic. Some tickets even appeared to defy the laws of time.
“The notice states that my vehicle was parked from 1.32pm until 12.15pm, which is not only incorrect but also an impossible timeframe,” one wrote in their appeal.
The council began officially using the LPR system, known as the Aero Ranger camera kit, in February after a six-month trial. The kit is attached to the windows of one of the council’s parking enforcement vehicles.
The camera records information about vehicles and visible parking signage as it drives around, then on its return, can register whether a car should have moved or whether it has paid for the parking.
The technology can also check that warrants of fitness and car registrations are current and identify vehicles that have been registered as stolen.
Local man Dave, who wanted only his first name used, said he has had three tickets waived since LPR was introduced.
One of the tickets was incorrect because the system had not recognised he had a parking pass, and the other two were waived after he continued to push back on the printing error.
Dave said he received the tickets in the post more than a month after the offences were committed, which was unfair because it did not allow him to properly defend against them.
“You’re relying on a system that hasn’t necessarily been challenged enough,” he said. “We’re the guinea pigs and we’re being used to sort through the issues with their system.”
One person appealed four tickets, saying it was “absolutely ridiculous and terrible ticket management”.
“Now you expect people to pay a massive amount of money up front or you will send collections? How does this provide opportunities for people to pay when you are dropping mass amounts on people? I will absolutely take responsibility for not paying for parking. That is okay. But finding out I have three tickets backdated to near a month ago? I need an explanation.”
The council has refused to waive most of the tickets, saying that while the times printed on the ticket were incorrect, the data and photographs collected by the system were not.
“LPR cameras record a vehicle’s licence plate number, location, tyre stem position, and the parking conditions that apply in an area,” council staff wrote in responses to the appeals.
“At times, things don’t always go according to plan, and some teething issues are always expected when a new system is adopted.”
So far, the new system has issued $873,000 worth of infringements, most of which were spread across the five months to July. Tickets given out by on-foot parking wardens – of which there are about five – totalled about $1.2 million over the five months.
Across the five months, the LPR system has been more than three times more lucrative than the average warden.
In the first few months of operation there were nearly 200 appeals relating to the LPR system, many of which resulted from the printing error.
About $1400 worth of these tickets were waived or cancelled, either due to a legitimate error or as a gesture of goodwill from the council.
“Council was comfortable with the legitimacy of all the LPR infringements that were issued, as they were backed by solid photographic evidence,” said the council’s head of environmental protection, Justin Roberts.
He said the council took note of complaints from drivers who received several tickets in the mail in one go, and who said they would not have committed subsequent offences if they had received a physical parking ticket sooner.
“In this regard, a one-off educational [lenient] approach was taken for the roll-out of the technology, and so some tickets were waived based on their own individual merits,” Roberts said.
He also referred to the high number of images that had to be reviewed by staff before tickets could be sent out, which meant tickets were only sent out about a fortnight after the offence. The council has now managed to bring this timeframe down to one week.
Similar LPR systems have been brought in by councils around New Zealand, including in Wellington, Auckland and Hamilton.
Melissa Nightingale is a Wellington-based reporter who covers crime, justice and news in the capital. She joined the Herald in 2016 and has worked as a journalist for 10 years.