Imagine being slapped with a £100 parking fine while doing something as environmentally friendly as charging your electric car. Sounds absurd, right? But this is exactly what happened to DT from Redhill, Surrey, and it’s a cautionary tale that highlights the murky waters of parking regulations and EV infrastructure. Here’s the full story—and trust me, it’s a doozy.
DT charged their electric vehicle at a 24-hour Mer EV charging station located in their local B&Q car park. Everything seemed straightforward—until a £100 parking charge notice (PCN) arrived from Ocean Parking, the car park operator. The reason? No parking is allowed on the site between 9pm and 6am. But here’s where it gets controversial: there were no signs near the EV charger explaining this restriction. Despite DT’s appeal, Ocean Parking rejected their representation, while Mer offered a half-hearted apology for the “inconvenience” but no real solution.
This dispute is nothing short of farcical. Mer’s website boldly advertises the charger as a 24-hour facility, and signs at the entrance to the retail park proclaim—in large, reassuring letters—that free parking for up to two hours is allowed. However, buried in the fine print are terms and conditions that Ocean Parking is now leaning on. And this is the part most people miss: these terms aren’t displayed on the entrance signs or anywhere near the EV charger. The only hint of a restriction is a tiny, nearly invisible line on a sign behind the charger, obscured by the cable frame, advising drivers to check for parking restrictions elsewhere in the car park.
When confronted, Mer was defensive, insisting their signage was adequate but admitting the 24-hour claim on their website had caused “confusion.” They’ve since updated the site. Ocean Parking, meanwhile, claimed they were unaware the charger was operational and assumed DT was simply parking. This excuse rings hollow, especially since DT’s appeal clearly stated they were using the charger—a fact Ocean acknowledged in their rejection letter, which also stated that charger users aren’t exempt from restrictions.
After some prodding, Ocean Parking finally relented—sort of. They admitted the signage near the charger only met the minimum standard and, in a rare moment of pragmatism, canceled all outstanding PCNs for that location, upheld appeals, and offered refunds to those who’d already paid. But the damage was already done, leaving many to wonder: how many others have been unfairly penalized?
This isn’t an isolated incident. In Leicestershire, CH found themselves in a similar nightmare after stopping on a road in a business park to enjoy a cup of coffee. Euro Parking Services (EPS) hit them with a £100 PCN for parking in a “restricted area” with “double yellow lines/crosshatched bay.” CH appealed and was asked to provide evidence of the restrictions—so they returned to the site to take photos. EPS’s response? Another £100 PCN. The CCTV photos attached to this second notice show CH straining to capture a tiny sign, mounted high on a pole, with print so small it’s barely legible. Worse, the photos also reveal there are no yellow lines or hatchings on the road.
EPS is a member of the International Parking Community (IPC), whose code of practice requires signs to be conspicuous and legible. They’re also supposed to allow drivers a five-minute grace period to check for restrictions. Yet, EPS refused to cancel either PCN—until I stepped in. They eventually dropped the second charge but stubbornly upheld the first, claiming they don’t penalize motorists for photographing signs. But isn’t that exactly what they did?
CH can appeal to the IPC, but if they lose, they’ll also forfeit a £40 early payment discount. It’s a lose-lose situation that raises bigger questions: Are private parking operators prioritizing profit over clarity? And how many drivers are being unfairly targeted due to inadequate signage?
Here’s the bigger question for you: Should EV charging stations be exempt from parking restrictions, especially when they’re advertised as 24-hour facilities? Or is it the driver’s responsibility to hunt down every hidden term and condition? Let us know your thoughts in the comments—this is a debate that’s far from over.
If you’ve faced a similar parking nightmare, we want to hear from you. Email us at consumer.champions@theguardian.com or write to Consumer Champions, Money, The Guardian, 90 York Way, London N1 9GU. Don’t forget to include a daytime phone number. All submissions are subject to our terms and conditions: https://www.theguardian.com/letters-terms.
