News / Council
Council was aware of parking fines issue last year
Staff dismissed concerns raised by ratepayer during budget process
Mark Phillips
MERRI-BEK Council has been aware for at least 12 months that it may have been overcharging motorists for parking fines before it took action last month to begin refunds.
The failure of the council to pass a resolution authorising motorists to be fined 0.5 penalty units rather than 0.2 penalty units was brought to the council’s attention during the preparation of last year’s budget.
The issue was raised by a ratepayer during the community consultation period but was dismissed by staff, according to publicly released council papers.
The year before, during preparation of the 2023-24 budget, a ratepayer also questioned why the council was charging the maximum penalty of 0.5 units for 11 parking infringements.
Last month, Merri-bek announced it would be introducing a refund scheme after discovering that it had been wrongly fining motorists twice what it should have been since 2013.
A new policy allowing the council to charge the maximum penalty was approved as part of an omnibus annual budget resolution at a special council meeting on June 23.
The policy, which was passed without any discussion or debate, is backdated to June 12, five days before the council publicly disclosed the parking fines error.
The council has apologised and said the administrative error had only been discovered recently.
Up to 250,000 fines have been impacted by the mistake over a 12-year period when the council was fining drivers twice it should have been for a range of minor parking offences in “green sign zones”.
Depending what year the infringement notice was issued, motorists could be due a refund of $43 and $59 for each offence.
The final bill for the council of providing the refunds could be anything between $10.7 million and $14.7 million.
The error and the way it has been communicated to ratepayers has been described as “scandalous” by a local government watchdog organisation, which has called for an independent investigation into the matter.
“The integrity of infringement and enforcement processes is paramount,” said Dean Hurlston, president of Council Watch Victoria.
“Sadly this has happened across the sector too many times. Victorians and Merri-bek residents, sadly, can have no confidence in Merri-bek council’s infringement team and senior leadership.”
Concerns that the council could be incorrectly charging a higher fine for parking infringements were outlined in a submission to the 2024-25 budget.
“The fees and charges schedule does not mention discretionary parking infringements,” the ratepayer, whose name was removed from the published submission, wrote to the council.
“… I would like to make a submission that the Council has not made a resolution to fix the penalty for this infringements above the statutory amount of 0.2 penalty units.
“So therefore the Council should not issue fines of 0.5 penalty units for these 11 parking offences. The correct penalty is 0.2 penalty units.”
But in its response, the council insisted that it had issued road safety infringements in accordance with state legislation.
“There are almost 300 penalties Council can enforce under the Road Safety Road Rules 2017 for which 11 have a minimum and maximum cost attributed,” it said.
“Council has the discretion to apply either the minimum or maximum penalty and Merri-bek, like many other inner-city councils, enforces these penalties at the maximum rate … As these are statutory fees there is no requirement for Council to make a resolution to fix the penalty.”
That advice has now proved to be wrong.
Merri-bek Chief Executive Officer Cathy Henderson confirmed that the council was made aware of the issue last year.
“Council is aware that a resident raised a concern about parking infringements in 2024 as part of our budget engagement process, but at that time, Council incorrectly thought that the resolution was in place,” she said.
“Subsequently when a Council officer identified a potential issue, we realised that further investigation was required.”
In their 2024 submission, the ratepayer also alluded to having raise the issue the year before.
There is a submission in the 2023-24 budget papers that refers to the council charging the maximum penalty for parking infringements, but it does not suggest that an error has been made by not passing a resolution authorising it. The submission instead calls for the council to charge the minimum 0.2 penalty units.
The council has set up an opt-in refund scheme that began on Wednesday. Motorists who believe they may have been overcharged in error must register with the council to firstly check if they are eligible for a refund.
The most common infringement affected was overstaying a parking time limit.
Among the other 10 infringements that were overcharged were failing to pay for parking; ignoring a no parking sign or stopping in a bike or motor bike parking area; and not completely being within a parking bay.
But some other offences, including parking in a clearway, in a loading zone and in a no stopping zone have been correctly charged throughout.
Hurlston said the council must disclose to the public what actions it has taken and explain what it knew and when. He said a full, independent investigation was needed and its findings should be released to the public.
He said the council should automatically refund motorists rather than make them apply for a refund.
“They know they will keep most potential refunds on an opt in scheme and shifting the burden of proof to the wronged consumer is appalling,” he said.
The council says it will not be fully refunding parking fines, and it will not be waiving valid infringement notices.
Comment has been sought from the Minister for Local Government, Nick Staikos.
If you liked this story, have you thought about supporting our work?
We are an independent, volunteer-run hyperlocal news organisation owned and run by the people in your community. With your support, we can continue to produce unique and valuable local journalism for Brunswick, Coburg and the inner north of Melbourne.
