The correct payment location said parking was free (2026)
Case 2240536969 / 2025-02-21 / Adjudicator Martin Hoare
Bank Lane
Martin Hoare allowed the appeal after screenshots showed the authorised payment app refusing payment and saying parking was free. That contemporaneous information contradicted the bay's payment requirement.
“the message indicate that parking was free.”
Martin Hoare, case 2240536969
The vehicle was in a shared-use bay where parking could be authorised by a permit or a paid session. The officer's photographs showed the operating-hours sign. The authority's records showed neither a valid permit nor an active payment session.
The driver supplied screenshots from the payment app for the correct location number. They stated that parking was currently free and would not accept payment. Martin Hoare accepted the driver's account and treated the contemporaneous screenshots as evidence, rather than merely an unsupported claim of an app problem.
The adjudicator found it reasonable to rely on that message. Taken together, the physical sign and app did not adequately convey the payment requirement or facilitate payment. That contradiction was the reason for allowing the appeal.
The useful comparison is a demonstrable conflict at the correct payment location. An incorrect location number, an assumed free period or a payment attempt without a record would not establish the same facts. This was not permission to ignore a permit-only restriction.
Source and case reference
Search for 2240536969 in the London Tribunals register to read the decision. This case explains how the adjudicator assessed its evidence; another appeal depends on its own facts and applicable restriction.
Find the official decision