Receiving a fine is never a nice experience, but it can be downright alarming if you know you didn’t actually commit the offence you’re being fined for.

The good news is, if you genuinely weren’t in the wrong, there are options available for contesting yourÌýparking or speedingÌýÌýfine. And if you can get your hands on the right evidence, you can have your fine dismissed.

Here’s a simple guide to contestingÌýa parking or speeding fine.

How to contest a parking fine

Step 1: Consider your options

If you believe you’ve been unfairly hit with a parking fine, you have three options:

• Pay up.
• Appeal to the council whose parking warden issued the fine.
• Contest your case in court.

To decide whether you should bother appealing, first weigh up the cost involved. If you choose to appear in court instead of appealing to the council first, factor in the time you’ll need to take off work.

Step 2: What’s your defence?

It’s not worth your while to put up a fight without proper preparation. Knowing which defences commonly work will greatly increase your chance of success. Procedures to appeal fines vary from state to state, but all require comprehensive documentation.

The most common reasons for incurring a fine will come as no surprise. But the grounds for contesting parking tickets differ with the offence:

• Parking without paying a meter fee.
• Overstaying your allotted time in a parking spot.
• Parking in residential or disabled parking areas without valid permits.

Which parking ticket defences work?

Common defences include:Ìý

• faulty parking meters
• a time-restriction signpost that was difficult to see
• blatant errors made by the council parking officer in issuing the ticket.

Which defences don’t work?

One council told ÌÇÐÄVlog the appeals that generally don’t fly include: “I forgot to check the sign”, “my appointment ran over time”, “it was raining”, “I was in a hurry”, and “I do not live in the area”.

Step 3. Gather your evidence

If you choose to appeal your fine, gather as much evidence as you can in your defence.

When ÌÇÐÄVlog extended a call-out to members to tell us how they’ve successfully contested their parking fines, we received more than 60 responses. Several told us of blatant mistakes made by parking wardens who issued notices when no offence was committed, or issued a ticket for the wrong offence.Ìý

Most cases had one thing in common: those who thought they were unjustly fined made sure they gathered as much information as possible at the scene of the “crime”.

Building up evidence increases your chances of winning your appeal. If it’s rejected by the council, you can still elect to have your case heard in court, so you’ll need the evidence anyway.

For example, taking a photo of your car, and capturing the immediate area around it, may help you dispute a ticket. If you were parked in a space that required a ticket and the ticket machine was faulty, take a photo of the faulty machine too.

Step 4: Submit your appeal

Many councils allow parking ticket appeals to be made online, so check your local council website for details. An online penalty review form may save you from writing out and posting a long explanation.Ìý

The timeline for appeals is limited in all states and territories, so you should act quickly, as the process can take months.

Case study: Lorraine’s experience

When Brisbane ÌÇÐÄVlog member Lorraine was told she had to pay a fine for not displaying a ticket – despite appealing to the council with photos showing there were no ticket machines in sight – she decided to go to court. “About a month later, I got a letter from the council that it had made a ‘technical error’ and that I was not required to pay the fine!”

Whether you intend to appeal or go to court, be sure to act quickly before the payment due date, as every reminder sent to you typically costs you further penalty fees.

Fighting a parking ticket in court

Going to court gives you the opportunity to defend your case in front of a magistrate, provided you’re prepared to take a day off work to attend.Ìý

The procedure generally starts with letting the relevant council know you intend to contest the case. The council contacts a magistrate’s court, which in turn lets you know the time and date of your appearance.

You’ll have to prepare supporting evidence to produce in court. If you convince the magistrate the fine was unfairly or mistakenly issued, your fine will be waived.Ìý

But remember – if you lose, you may have to pay the fine, as well as the costs to the court and the council that issued the fine.

How to contest private car park fines

If the fine is from aÌýprivate car park operatorÌýand you think the fine is dodgy, you should appeal to theÌýconsumer protection agencyÌýin your state.

In recent years, many private car park operators have focused more on issuing dodgy fines than collecting legitimate fees – and the fines are often not enforceable. State courts have cracked down on these rogue operators.Ìý

In an earlier investigation, the NSW Roads and Maritime Service told ÌÇÐÄVlog that “funds claimed by car park companies are not fines and we advise customers to seek professional advice” if they receive a demand for payment.

How to contest speed camera fines

If you receive a speed camera fine, you may be able to get away with a caution. You can submit an appeal to the police or road authority in your state for the penalty to be withdrawn, or contest your case in court.

But any decision will depend on how fast you were going, your driving record, and other circumstances – such as if you weren’t the driver or were rushing because of an emergency.Ìý

The circumstances in which a caution can be granted differ from state to state.

Are speed cameras reliable?

Aside from extenuating circumstances, you may want to appeal a speed camera fine because the speed camera wasn’t working properly. There’s plenty of evidence that the technology is not always spot-on – and it’s a longstanding problem.

In 2017, thousands of speed and red light camera fines were withdrawn in Victoria after it emerged that the technology had been infected with a ransomware virus.Ìý

‘Reliability is poor’

In early 2014 the ACT auditor-general, Maxine Cooper, issued a report that called the effectiveness and reliability of speed cameras into question. “Speed camera reliability is poor, particularly for mobile speed cameras,” Cooper told the ABC, adding that more and more motorists were successfully contesting speeding fines in the ACT.

In 2011, the NSW government had to pay back about $32,000 in fines to motorists who had incurred fines in Sydney’s Lane Cove Tunnel because of problems with the certification of two speed cameras.

And in 2010, 380 Sydney drivers were wrongly fined on the Kingsway at Miranda, resulting in the withdrawal of about $49,000 in fines and the restoration of the associated demerit points. The camera was in a school zone but was not correctly synced with school zone hours.

Aside from operational malfunctions, there are lingering questions about whether speed cameras improve safety and are optimally placed. Some say speed cameras are more about raising state revenue than making roads safer, although ÌÇÐÄVlog certainly supports any measures that make Australia’s roads safer.

Councils don’t always get it right

In February 2020, three Melbourne councils were forced to refund about $20 million in parking fines issued over a 10-year period to thousands of motorists after an investigation by the Victorian Ombudsman.Ìý

And that wasn’t the first time. It was reported in 2015 that about 44,000 parking fines in Melbourne had been waived over a three-year period.

It happens in other states, too. In February 2019, hundreds of $263 parking fines were withdrawn on the NSW Central Coast after a public outcry and the involvement of the local member of state parliament.Ìý

Fairly enough, the highest parking fine you can cop in NSW ($704) is for falsely displaying a disabled parking sticker. Next comes stopping or parking in a disabled spot ($587).ÌýÌý

We certainly don’t recommend that you do either of the above, but fighting a fine can be worthwhile – if you have a solid case.

The post How to contest a speeding or parking fine appeared first on ÌÇÐÄVlog.

Driving on Australia’s major toll roads can put a big dent in the household budget these days, and many commuters have little choice but to use them.Ìý

According to the Australian Automobile Association’s (AAA) transport affordability index, motorists in the middle to outer suburbs of Sydney pay an average of $81 a week on tolls, the highest toll costs in the nation. It reportedly adds up to about $2 billion a year for Sydney residents.

In Melbourne and Brisbane the average is $57–58 a week for people commuting in and out of the city from the suburbs. (The AAA calculations are estimates based on a family of two working parents and two kids living in middle to outer suburbs with high population densities.) Ìý

But it can get a lot more expensive if something goes wrong with your toll payment, especially if the toll is operated by Australia’s biggest toll operator, Transurban.Ìý

Steep fees for unpaid tolls

Transurban commands an 83% share of the toll road market according to Nicholas Schroeder ofÌý the research firm IBISWorld. Overall, the toll collection industry is expected to generate $3.1 billion in revenue in 2022–23 with a profit margin of around 42%, the firm reports.Ìý

Transurban’s Australian e-tag business, called Linkt, operates on a number of central arteries running through metropolitan Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane.Ìý

Motorists are generally made aware of a missed payment when an overdue notice arrives in the mail. If you’re facing a number of unpaid Linkt tolls, each invoice will have a steep administrative fee attached, one that goes up significantly if you don’t pay before a second notice arrives.Ìý

The unpaid toll notice can sometimes be triggered by an administrative error rather than a deliberate non-payment, but that won’t stop the notices and hefty admin fees from coming in.

Queensland class actionÌý

In Queensland there’s a class action underway against Transurban on the grounds that it violated the state’s Transport Infrastructure Act by adding unreasonably high administrative fees to unpaid toll notices.

The class action also includes the state of Queensland and the Brisbane City Council (BCC) “if the state and BCC set or imposed the amount of these fees”.ÌýÌý

According to the law firm running the class action, Piper Alderman, Linkt was charging an initial $8.50 administrative fee in addition to the toll charge for every unpaid fee notice when the class action was launched, and $23.81 per follow-up (or ‘demand’) notice if the initial notice wasn’t paid within 10 days.Ìý

The current Linkt unpaid toll administrative fees in Queensland are $9.48 initially and $26.55 for every follow up notice. (In Sydney the figures are $10 and $20; in Melbourne it’s $14.22 and $27.75.)Ìý

Admin fees this high can send a driver’s debt into the thousands of dollars – far beyond what the initial toll charges would have added up to.Ìý

And in Brisbane, along with the Linkt charges, you may also be fined $201 by the Department of Transport and Main Roads or the Brisbane City Council for each unpaid day of travel if you don’t pay an overdue toll notice. In Melbourne, Victoria Police can fine you for unpaid tolls in addition to any Linkt fees.Ìý

According to reporting by the ABC in 2021, the Queensland State Penalties Enforcement Registry was attempting to collect more than $150 million in unpaid toll debts, some of which were many times more than the original toll amounts. In one case, a driver reportedly owed $1500 on initial toll fees of less than $20.

Tolling customer ombudsman

Along with the class action, Transurban’s unpaid toll collection practices have been the cause of a number of complaints to the Tolling Customer Ombudsman (TCO), a dispute resolution service set up in 2004 by Transurban. According to the company, the TCO makes independent decisions about toll disputes.Ìý

The TCO received 591 complaints in 2022, lower than the historical average of 1000 a year due to the lingering effects of COVID-19 on road traffic.Ìý

Most of the complaints to the TCO have been about fines and administrative fees, though account management complaints have been on the rise in recent years.ÌýÌý

In some cases, complaints to the TCO involving tens of thousands of dollars in unpaid tolls and related fees can’t be resolved by the ombudsman because the fines were imposed by state authorities.

E-tag cancellation no easy matterÌý

One account management case that was recently lodged with the TCO highlights how frustrating dealing with Transurban can be.Ìý

Ross tells ÌÇÐÄVlog that his wife’s attempt to cancel her 89-year-old father’s Linkt e-tag involved multiple phone calls, extended hold times, and, finally, trips to her father’s nursing home so he could talk to Transurban, even though she made clear that she had power of attorney to act on his behalf.Ìý

Transurban was given the father’s name and credit card number, but the call centre people wanted the couple to track down his e-tag serial number and the registration number for his most recent vehicle, which was no small undertaking. In the end, even that wasn’t enough to get the tag cancelled.Ìý

“It was a very simple matter, but it was made as difficult as possible, ” Ross says. “We’re not talking about accessing someone’s bank account here. We’re just talking about canceling an e-tag for an 89-year-old-man. They clearly identified they were speaking to the right person, but failed on multiple occasions to cancel the tag. So I just don’t see how it could be any worse.”

Fees more than double the original tollÌý

While the TCO has ruled in favour of the toll operator in every published decision, lodging a complaint appears to be worthwhile. (The ombudsman only renders a decision when a toll customer and Transurban can’t come to an agreement themselves.)Ìý

In many cases, Transurban has drastically reduced the amounts owed by toll customers by removing some or all of the extra fees.Ìý

In one case we reviewed, a Sydney driver owed $10,234 before filing a complaint with the TCO. As with other cases, Transurban had referred the case to a debt collector, the cause of considerable stress for the toll customer.Ìý

Transurban agreed to replace the administrative fees with ‘transfer’ fees, bringing the debt down to $3048, a reduction of $7185. (Linkt’s admin fees were $10–20 per notice in this case; its transfer fees were $1.10–2.90 per notice.)

Similarly, a woman’s toll debt was reduced from $5078 to $1158, indicating that $3920 of the debt was from administrative and other fees rather than the toll amount itself.Ìý

Drivers who take issue with smaller amounts have also seen their debts greatly reduced. A Brisbane driver’s debt was reduced from $174 to $24, for instance, after the admin fees were removed.

Are tolls roads fit for purpose?Ìý

Dr Michelle Zeibots, a senior lecturer in transport at University of Technology Sydney, tells ÌÇÐÄVlog that Sydney in particular has an unusually high number of toll roads by global standards, adding that “there is a great deal of debate about whether many of them are necessary”.Ìý

Having to pay a lot to use them but still being stuck in traffic raises questions about whether motorists are getting good value for money, Zeibots says.Ìý

“You will never build your way out of congestion in large cities like Sydney, Melbourne, or Brisbane, and it’s congestion levels that raise questions about a tollway being fit for purpose,” Zeibots says.Ìý

There’s a built-in conflict when private companies like Transurban enter into contracts with state governments, since Transurban stands to benefit from congested toll roads and lose out if there are better public transportation options.Ìý

“This dilemma is the reason why involvement of private sector interests in the provision of essential transport services has always been fraught,” Zeibots says.Ìý

It becomes even more fraught when fines for unpaid tolls go well beyond the original toll charges, she says.Ìý

“This is an area that needs to be highly scrutinised and regulated by government. If an entity is applying charges in order to increase profit margins, this has a deleterious impact on transport efficiency from a consumer perspective.”

An independent review of road tolls and fees in NSW was tabled in the state parliament in May this year. Public hearings on the issue are expected to take place in the second half of 2023.Ìý

A spokesperson for the state agency Transport for NSW told ÌÇÐÄVlog the review will aim to “find a simpler and more equitable system for the people of NSW and will be a thorough review of Sydney’s toll network. This includes the make-up of administration fees.”

Transurban respondsÌý

Toll operator Transurban paints a very different picture of toll costs than the AAA or some of the TCO decisions.Ìý

“Linkt customers travelling in a private vehicle spend an average of $6.70 per week on tolls, with 82% spending less than $10 per week,” a spokesperson told us, pointing out that the AAA calculations of a typical household are based on 2016 census data.Ìý

According to the 2021 census, however, a family of two parents and two kids is still the most prevalent type of household in Australia.Ìý

The discrepancy between the AAA and Transurban figures, which the company says are a national average based on Transurban’s customer data, underscores the many variables at play when trying to determine toll costs.Ìý

The NSW Labor government’s commitment to cap toll costs at $60 a week starting in 2024, for instance, is expected to affect 51,000 drivers, a relatively small proportion of drivers using Transurban toll roads in NSW.

Transurban says it has proposed to the NSW Government to allow multiple unpaid tolls to be included on a single notice, which already happens in Queensland and Victoria. Under this system, toll customers pay one administrative fee for a notice covering three days of travel regardless of the number of tolls they go through.Ìý

“Toll notice aggregation could be fairer for NSW customers, reducing the confusion that comes with receiving multiple toll notices,” the spokesperson says.Ìý

Mixed messages on who sets admin feesÌý

As for administrative fees for unpaid toll invoices, Transurban says they are regulated by the respective states “and cover the costs associated with collecting unpaid tolls”.

The company told us that Transport for NSW, for instance, prints and issues the notices in the state and has exclusive access to its driver registration database. The $10 and $20 administration fees for NSW toll notices predate Transurban’s involvement in tolling operations in the state, the company says.Ìý

A spokesperson for the Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads confirmed that the state sets the maximum toll and toll notice fees but added that “the toll road operator may use its discretion to charge up to the maximum set by the government, and may choose to charge less than the maximum”.

A spokesperson for the Victoria Department of Transport and Planning told us that Transurban toll notice fees are not a transport-related issue.

Ombudsman: Admin fees a systemic issueÌý

Tolling Customer Ombudsman Phillip Davies tells ÌÇÐÄVlog that “where a consumer raises the fairness of the administration fees, this issue is dealt with”, adding that “often, reducing or waiving these fees is part of early resolution offers”.Ìý

“Given the frequency of this occurring, this apparent systemic issue has been raised with Transurban. TCO understands these fees and other charges are set under agreements with the relevant state government, however, so the issue of the level of the fees and charges is beyond our jurisdiction,” Davies says.Ìý

Toll rebates in NSWÌý

are available for NSW residents. Here are the details:Ìý

• If you spend more than $375 a year on tolls you can claim a 40% rebate capped at $750.Ìý
• for tolls charged from 1 July 2022 to 30 June 2023 the deadline to claim a rebate is 30 June 2024.
• for tolls charged from 1 July 2023 to 30 June 2024 the deadline is 30 June 2025.Ìý
• the NSW Labor Government has committed to a $60 per week cap on tolls (in addition to the current rebate) starting in 2024.Ìý

Hardship provisionsÌý

If you’ve racked up a number of unpaid tolls and are having trouble paying them, you can apply to Linkt for assistance. The toll operator says it will negotiate payment plans with customers and notify state authorities of your financial situation (with your consent). For people who can demonstrate they’ve been affected by unemployment, homelessness, domestic violence or health issues, Linkt toll credits are available.Ìý

If you feel you’ve been charged unfair fees, lodge a complaint with theÌý.

The post The high cost of road toll notices appeared first on ÌÇÐÄVlog.

On this page:

• Mishmash of a systemÌý
• Fines frenzy
• Administrative fees
• Pricey postage
• Transurban speaks
• Tolling Customer Ombudsman (TCO)

And if you’ve been on the receiving end of a toll collection notice, you may have experienced how hard it can be to get the matter resolved, even if the whole thing’s a big mix-up.

What you may not know is that in Australia, toll collection is dominated by a single ASX-listed, multi-billion-dollar Melbourne-based company called Transurban, and it’s operating under lucrative state government contracts which generally run up to 30 years or more.

Over the 12 months up to 30 June 2017, Transurban’s toll revenue rose 11.4% to $2.083 billion while its after-tax profit went up 850% from $22 million to $209 million.Ìý

But it’s questionable whether Transurban, which collects toll charges on 13 of Australia’s 16 toll roads, is dedicating enough of these funds to customer service.

Some would say the road toll business model itself is less than customer-friendly.Ìý

State governments have little oversight over whether the toll collectors they contract out to are being fair to motorists, but it’s often the state agencies that will come after you if you fail to pay.Ìý

And failure to pay – even if you’re unaware you’d incurred charges – will see the original toll fee multiplying each day as hefty administration fees tacked on by the toll collector are eventually topped off by a state-issued fine.

Once the state comes after you, it’s out of the toll collector’s hands.

It doesn’t help that the toll collector’s administration fees appear to be well out of line with any semblance of cost recovery either.

Mishmash of a systemÌý

Australia’s privately run road toll system doesn’t always offer users a fair deal, as toll costs can vary depending on where you live.

For instance, Sydney’s Westlink M7 and WestConnex M4 are tolled by distance, whereas the older M2 and M5 charge a single fee no matter how far you travel.Ìý

The Sydney Harbour Bridge and Sydney Harbour Tunnel both have three different time-of-day rates, but the three-tiered system only operates in one direction. So motorists coming from northwest Sydney pay more than those coming from southwest Sydney.

It’s generally the case that the farther you live from Sydney’s employment opportunities (perhaps because you can’t afford to live closer) the more you pay to reach them, a situation that holds true in other capital cities as well.

Many see this as a form of discrimination against outlying, lower-income commuters who have no choice but to take the toll roads to get to work.

According to the Melbourne-based Western Community Legal Centre (also called WEstjustice), toll debts disproportionally affect lower-income, outer-suburb neighbourhoods and outstanding fines from $20,000 up to $200,000 are becoming more common.

Toll charges vs service delivery

Then there’s the matter of cost versus services rendered. The Western Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils has estimated a daily return trip from the North Western Growth Centre (encompassing the Blacktown, Hills Shire and Hawkesbury councils) to the city at $27.62 a day.

This adds up to about nine percent of average weekly earnings in Australia and 20% of the minimum weekly wage.

Value for money?

Do the tolls we pay accurately reflect the cost of building and maintaining the road? That’s hard to say, because the financial arrangements between the states and toll collectors are far from transparent.

What’s clear is that collectors often raise tolls on one road to help pay for another, which you may or may not end up driving on.

Then there’s the question of whether we should be paying a toll at all if the road becomes all but dysfunctional when you need it most, as is often the case at peak traffic times in major cities. Is it fit for purpose when your commute grinds to a halt?

Regardless of whether you get what you pay for, toll collectors are eager to win state contracts and start debiting your dollars.

Fines frenzy

As of March 2017, Queensland’s road-toll debt was $233 million. And in Victoria, infringement warrants for toll fines added up to $687 million in 2015, according to WEstjustice.

About 70,000 Queenslander motorists who are in arrears simply can’t afford to pay down this outstanding debt, according to a recent report by the Queensland parliament. For these citizens, unpaid community service may be the only option.Ìý

The degree to which these fines are attributable to mistakes on the part of the toll collector rather than the motorist is open to question. But big toll collectors like Transurban will certainly play hardball when it comes to collecting unpaid tolls.

Costly mistakes

In one case cited by Toll Redress, a Queensland-based toll user advocacy group, a Brisbane man ended up $30,000 in debt and had his licence suspended as a result of what he said was a lack of proper notification from Transurban and the piling on of a $23.46 administration charge for every unpaid $4.39 toll.

When he said he could afford to pay the tolls but not the admin fees, Transurban said no deal. So the driver contacted Toll Redress, who helped make the case to Transurban that its administration fees greatly exceeded the cost of issuing invoices.

Transurban eventually waived the fees and the unpaid tolls.

In another case in late 2016 that appeared on A Current Affair, the owner of a small trucking business attempted to resolve $1800 worth of toll charges levied by Transurban’s Brisbane brand,ÌýGo Via, that were incorrectly invoiced.

He got nowhere with Go Via and ended up receiving a $66,000 collection notice from Queensland’s State Penalty Enforcement Registry after administration fees and state fines were applied. The Registry then seized and sold one of his trucks to clear the debt.

If complaints are anything to go by, Go Via is the most troublesome toll road currently operating.

At fault by default

According to Toll Redress co-founder Michael Fraser, the service has heard from hundreds of consumers from all walks of life who’ve been caught up in costly disputes with Transurban.

“It seems to be a system that’s designed so that whether it’s the fault of the toll collector or the driver, it becomes the fault of the driver by default. And because of not-always-reliable notification procedures, you can just keep driving and thinking everything’s all good until you receive a bundle of notices in the mail.”

A common problem, says Fraser, is when Transurban declares that a toll user’s account has insufficient funds to cover a direct debit, so suspends the account and starts charging a higher rate per toll.

“The first you’re going to hear about it is when you get a notice in the mail,” explains Fraser. “By the time the driver catches on to what’s happening, multiple toll notices are in the mail, each with a high administration fee,” he adds.

And if you don’t get the letter because of postal issues or your details aren’t up-to-date with the motor vehicle registry, you can expect a state infringement notice and hundreds of dollars owed per unpaid toll.

“In many cases, drivers have demonstrated to us – and attempted to demonstrate to Transurban – that their accounts were in fact fully solvent and the mistake was Transurban’s or the bank’s. A lot of people tell us that they never received a notice as well, so they end up owning hundreds of dollars for an alleged infraction that they were completely unaware of. When this happens, Transurban is not easy to deal with,” says Fraser. Ìý

Administrative fees

According to some calculations, Transurban routinely charge 10 times or more of the actual cost of mailing out an invoice, though these fees are reviewed and approved by state authorities.

Add state infringement penalties to the admin costs and your original toll charge can go as high as $345 in Victoria. And if you still fail to make payment after that, loss of licence, property seizure and wage garnishment may follow.

As Toll Redress puts it, “Our observation is that existing escalation arrangements enslave people in a vicious cycle of confusion, stress and financial strain.”

During a state parliament hearing in March this year, the fee arrangements for Queensland’s State Penalties Enforcement Registry were described as “complicated, inconsistent and inflexible”.

One motorist who lodged a complaint with the Tolling Customer Ombudsman (TCO) in July 2016 made the case that nearly 80% of her $7300 unpaid Roam Tolling (part-owned by Transurban) charges were administrative fees.

With a debt collection agency on her back, the woman’s initial calls to Transurban about the matter weren’t returned or kept on record, she said in the complaint.

Eventually she reached an agreement with Transurban to pay $2973.43, which she assumed included the $750 she’d already paid.

When Transurban said the previous payments were not included, the TCO got involved and Transurban ended up giving the woman a $250 credit for tolls already paid (down from $375, which the TCO had initially called for).

Pricey postage

In a 2016 letter to the TCO, Transurban confirmed that its administration fees “are required to reflect the actual cost associated with issuing these invoices/notices and are regularly audited to ensure compliance”.

But charging $12.14 to send a letter (or $23.89 for a follow-up letter) to a motorist – or charging this much for each toll listed in a single letter – would seem to contradict this claim. Particularly when, in 2002, an accounting firm hired by the Victorian Government found the cost to Transurban to send out a collection letter would fall somewhere between 28–93 cents.

Transurban speaks

Transurban Customers and Communities Advocate Jean Ker Walsh says the company is often willing to come to an agreement on outstanding debts.

“The size and the complexity of the customer service side of our business certainly poses some challenges, but I would say we put a lot of effort into it and empower our staff to deal with issues in a personalised, case-by-case way,” she says. “We deal with a huge number of issues and we resolve most of them at point of call.

“Perhaps what we haven’t done as well as we could have is to let people know that assistance is available and how to access it. Our difficulty is that we don’t know where our customers are having problems unless they tell us.”

As for administration costs, Walsh says they reflect the cost of tracking down the names and addresses of drivers who don’t have Transurban accounts, based on a toll camera photograph and then sending out the notices.

“We know two things: the size of the vehicle and the number plate. That’s all we know.”

When toll users receive unexpected collection letters, Walsh advises they take action immediately.

“If a toll user has any problem at all they should come into us sooner rather than later. We will make concessions in hardship cases, but it’s the responsibility of the vehicle owner to make sure they don’t sell a car to someone and forget to inform Transurban or the motor vehicle registry, for instance. We can’t just write it off if you make a mistake, because then everyone will be coming to us with the same story.”

In line with what the TCO told us, Walsh says the administration fees were approved by the respective state authorities and reflect Transurban’s true administrative costs. Yet Walsh says the company has rolled out a new fee regime in NSW, Victoria and Queensland in which collection letters will combine six toll charges with a single administration fee, instead of an admin fee for each toll.

Asked how this new initiative aligns with Transurban’s longstanding contention that an admin fee for every toll charge was justified, Walsh failed to offer a clear explanation, saying “we will be collecting less in fees”.

“We can make mistakes just as anybody can, and technology can go wrong as well,” she adds. “But if it’s brought to our attention that it’s our mistake and not the toll user’s, we will move to fix it very, very quickly.”

How to contest a fine

Motorists must first lodge a complaint with the toll collector and give it time to address the issue.

If the toll collector gives you the run-around or you are unhappy with their decision, you can lodge a complaint with the TCOÌýÌýor call 1800 145 009.

But the TCO has no jurisdiction when it comes to state fines applied when a toll collector refers your case to a state penalty enforcement body. It also has no power to demand monetary compensation by a toll operator in the event that its behaviour caused economic loss to a toll user beyond the toll and related charges.

What the TCO can do is act as an intermediary between you and the toll collector to come to an agreement over disputed toll charges and administration fees.

If you don’t like a TCO decision, you’re not bound by it. You can escalate the complaint to other authorities, such as state consumer protection agencies or the courts.

Tolling Customer Ombudsman (TCO)

The TCOÌýwas set up in 2004 in Victoria to help resolve consumer complaints about tolls. It’s run by Victoria barrister and solicitor Michael Arnold and currently operates in Victoria, NSW and Queensland.

Major toll operators ConnectEast, Interlink Roads, and Transurban and their regional brands (listed below) are required to abide by TCO decisions.

The big toll operators’ regional brands:

• CityLink
• EastLink
• E-way/M5 South-West Motorway
• Go Via
• Roam
• Transurban Linkt

As of July 2017, the TCO has received about 7000 complaints since its inception. Some of the common issues include being charged for tolls on cars they hadn’t owned for years, plus credit card and other administrative mix-ups that led to exorbitant fine notices and threatening collection letters.

But according to Ombudsman Michael Arnold, “The overwhelming number of toll road users meet toll payment requirements in time or upon receipt of a toll invoice.”Ìý

When that doesn’t happen, it’s generally for one of the following reasons:

• Your account with a toll operator doesn’t have up-to-date or correct address details with the state motor vehicle registry, in which case notices are sent to incorrect addresses.
• You haven’t advised the toll operator or the state motor vehicle registry of the sale of a vehicle to a third party, in which case tolls incurred by the third party will continue to be charged to the seller’s account.
• You lack sufficient funds in a credit card or bank account at the time a cumulative toll charge is applied.

In Arnold’s experience, toll collectors have been willing to make a deal with toll users who rack up high charges.

“I can’t say that toll operators don’t make errors in the course of their administration, but when errors happen I expect toll operators to redress the problem, and they do,” he says. “The toll operators will generally make concessions and reduce the fees. That happens more often than not.

“But when the matter gets escalated from the toll operator to a state agency, that’s a big problem because the toll operator has limited ability to control the state agency. However, there have been cases where a toll operator agrees to withdraw a number of the toll notices that have been escalated.”

Arnold adds that toll operators aren’t allowed to apply penalties in the form of admin fees in Queensland and Victoria and that such fees must be limited to the costs borne by the toll operator. But it remains a murky area.Ìý

“These administration fees are fixed in consultation with the state governments as part of the contract,” he says. “I don’t have jurisdiction over that, but they obviously have to justify the fees to the state governments before they charge them.”

The post Toll road costs and fines appeared first on ÌÇÐÄVlog.

In the cases ÌÇÐÄVlog has heard about, the operator gives no clear indication that a parking ticket is needed, and then sticks a $66 or $88 notice on vehicles that don’t display one.

The confusing part for drivers is that the parking is generally free for an hour or two and there are no boom gates or ticket machines at the entrance – but you still need to display a ticket.

Are private car park fines legal?

If you’re fined and fail to send off the cash, you can expect a threatening note on paper with a legal letterhead and an updated demand for about $170. According to Melbourne-based traffic court barrister Sean Hardy, “it is impossible for a private car park company to issue a fine, so the $88 claim is not a fine even though they try to make it look like one”.

“Private companies are never allowed to issue their own parking fines or enforce them in a court, so instead the company says it is claiming the money under a contract it has with the driver,” Hardy adds.

The NSW Roads and Maritime Service (RMS, formerly the RTA) also told ÌÇÐÄVlog that “funds claimed by car park companies are not fines and we advise customers to seek professional advice” if they receive a demand for payment.

Some car park operators may use the term “liquidated damages” instead of “fine” in their collection notices, based on the premise that the motorist has entered a contract by using the car park. But Hardy says the contract argument is flimsy and “even if the driver has entered into a contract with the car park company, the contract cannot lawfully claim a sum that is greater than the reasonable loss suffered by the company as a result of the breach of contract”. He estimates any reasonable loss to be less than $10.

Deceptive tactics

Hardy believes the set-up of ‘free’ car parks can be deceptive. “The number of consumers who receive a demand after parking at a ‘first hour free’ car park is high, and all of them say they are misled by the signs. If it’s mandatory for all drivers to display a ticket, why not have the ticket machine at the boom gate like legitimate car parks?”

State road agencies revolt

Consumer Affairs Victoria and NSW Fair Trading receive a high number of complaints about private car park operators every year.

VicRoads was reportedly obliged by state courts to provide the details of about 70,000 car registrations to car park operators so they could mail out demands for payment.

In 2011, the RTA appealed a NSW court order to provide names and addresses to private operator Care Park. The RTA lost the appeal but protested that it shouldn’t have been forced to surrender motorist details since, among other things, any legal action attempted by Care Park “would be doomed to fail”.

Still, the game went on. In 2012 one of the biggest operators, Australian National Car Parks (ANCP), was in court in Sydney attempting to obtain motorists’ names and addresses from the RMS. Earlier that year, the RMS mailed a letter to ANCP and Care Park fine recipients warning that the agency had been ordered by the court to release their names and addresses and providing a list of consumer protection agencies.

ÌÇÐÄVlog has uncovered close links between ANCP and Australian Recovery and Collections, which have been owned and run by the same company directors and have had the same business address.

A few consumer wins

In April 2012, the Victorian Supreme Court ordered Ace Parking and its officers, Kevin John English and James John English, to stop using misleading tactics and fined the company $14,500.

The tactics, which were found to violate the Fair Trading Act, included issuing fines and threatening legal action without legal authority, mimicking the look and language of legitimate council and government notices, and harassing people to pay.

In late 2012 the NSW Parliament passed legislation that prevents private car park operators from gaining access to motorists’ personal information to send out demands for payment. The bill was designed to prevent courts from forcing the RMS to disclose personal information if it’s for the purpose of collecting private car park fines.

These are important consumer wins, but motorists should still be on the lookout for deceptive tactics and dodgy fines, since oversight of the practice is less than airtight.

Contact the consumer protection agency in your state if you believe you’ve been hit with a dodgy private car park fine.

The post Private car park fines appeared first on ÌÇÐÄVlog.