Parking is big business in Brighton and Hove.

In the 2008-09 financial year Brighton and Hove City Council made £20 million from the proceeds of parking, through sales of permits, pay and display tickets and fines.

That’s without the cut taken by NSL, the former NCP Services Ltd, who have a contract from the council to run the wardens who enforce parking controls.

So it is little wonder the residents and visitors who have forked out those millions feel strongly about the way the parking system is controlled.

There are many gripes among drivers in the city – congestion, labyrinthine one-way systems and roadworks.

But none of these cause as much irritation as parking controls.

Finding a space to park in most areas of the city, particularly in the centre, is always a challenge – even if you have the relevant permit – and the car parks are almost uniformly expensive.

Being faced with over-officious parking wardens, who will pounce on you given the slightest excuse, just compounds the trouble.

Change

It is that situation which led Liberal Democrat councillor Paul Elgood to speak out this week to call for changes to the warden regime.

New figures showed 921 appeals had been lodged against parking fines in the city in the past year, a rate of 18 a week, leading Councillor Elgood and others to surmise the wardens were not being entirely fair with their ticketing.

His opinion was backed by numerous examples of people who have faced fines for innocent mistakes, like displaying tickets in the wrong place or upside down.

He called for the council to end its contract with NSL and bring the warden service inhouse so a more common sense approach can be introduced with less commercial pressure.

That idea has been welcomed by residents.

Steve Percy, chairman of Brighton and Hove campaign group People’s Parking Protest, said: “If it was in-house the council would not need to make as much money because there would be no cut for NSL and the council could take a softly, softly approach.

“NSL keeps insisting it doesn’t set any targets for wardens to meet or give bonuses for issuing tickets but there will always be an incentive for them – keeping their jobs.

If they aren’t issuing tickets they aren’t making any money for the company.

“In fairness to the wardens, there are some who are good and do show common sense.

If someone is parked in the wrong place to unload, for example, I’ve seen them go to speak to them and try to help them, rather than just issue a ticket.

“But others do seem not to use any sense.

I know a lady who came home on the night of Pride and all the residents’ bays were filled by people who had parked illegally in them so she ended up driving around and around and when she couldn’t find a space she left her car on double yellow lines, which she is entitled to do because she has a disabled blue badge.

A warden came around at 11pm and issued her with a ticket.

“You have to ask what are people supposed to do? Where are they supposed to park if all the bays are filled.”

Roger McArthur, of campaign group Traders Against Parking Persecution, said there were a large number of issues and something needed to change, agreeing that moving the service in-house could be the solution.

He said: “I don’t think the wardens are getting enough training, either that or they are deliberately issuing more tickets for some reason.

“They don’t know the rules and regulations.

I’ve had to set them straight a couple of times.”

The council and NSL have insisted there is nothing wrong with the service, pointing out that the number of appeals is fewer than 1% of the 129,837 fines issued and reaffirming no targets are used.

The council said income from fines was spent on transport projects, including subsidising bus routes and funding concessionary fares, as well as building cycle paths and parking.

Gary Webb, NSL’s marketing and communication manager, said contractors and their staff were judged on how well transport objectives have been achieved rather than their output in terms of fines.

But both the council and NSL will continue to be judged on the injustice felt by the victims of the 1% of questionable fines and both must work to eradicate the over-zealous approach which seems to be applied by some wardens.