Opposition councillors are querying whether or not a proposed parking price hike is legal.

The Brighton and Hove Conservatives are warning the increases in charges for permits and council may be unlawful as councils cannot legally use parking tariffs to raise funds.

But Ian Davey, the council’s lead member for transport, said there is no evidence of any failing.

Councillor Graham Cox raised his concerns at a transport committee meeting last week and pointed to the example of Barnet London Borough Council which was taken to the High Court after increasing permit costs to £100.

In 2013 it was ruled the London council did not have the power to charge residents for parking with intent to raise revenue for other transport purposes.

Councillor Cox said: “It is quite clear from the case law that it is unlawful for councils to set charges for the ‘express purpose of creating a surplus’ yet that is exactly what this council is proposing through its latest price hikes.

“Interestingly, Barnet proposed raising the cost of their resident permits to £100, a level that the judge considered unlawful yet our residents are being expected to fork out £166 if they pay quarterly.”

A report presented to Brighton and Hove City Council details the parking charges are being raised to help tackle congestion and pollution rather than to raise funds.

Councillor Geoffrey Theobald warned the council needs to be “very careful” and accused the authority of using charges to “help fill their budget black hole”.

Councillor Ian Davey, lead member for transport, said: “Councillor Cox and his Conservative colleagues have often implored us to follow the example of Tory led Barnet as they cut public services to the bone and outsource what's left to the lowest bidder.

“An approach which has often seen them taken to court by their own outraged residents.

“I can assure Councillor Cox that there is no evidence of similar failings here in Brighton and Hove and no intention of following their reckless approach to local government.

“As he is a former head of Sussex CID I would expect him to examine the evidence and present his case clearly before make such a suggestion in public rather than just casting vague assertions as he appears to be doing here.”