Key Points

• Four London councils—Hackney, Lewisham, Wandsworth and Croydon—used public money to pay parking and traffic fines for staff and contractors over several years.
• The amounts disclosed range from £3,244 in Croydon (Jan 2023–Mar 2025) to £15,350 in Lewisham (May 2024–Dec 2025), with Hackney spending £10,250 in the last financial year and Wandsworth £10,040 (Jan 2023–Mar 2026).
• The figures come from spending records that are published inconsistently; some councils only disclose card payments above £250, and several only revealed PCN payments after Freedom of Information requests.
• Croydon Mayor Jason Perry last year promoted a “zero tolerance” approach to illegal parking, including towing vehicles of those who “do not pay your way”, while the council settled £3,244 in staff fines.
• Wandsworth said it settled charges to secure early-payment discounts and would seek recovery from drivers “if they were found to be at fault”, though it did not specify how often recovery was pursued.
• Hackney’s cabinet member for transport said 96% of fines were paid personally by drivers, with council cover limited to rare, exceptional cases such as emergency response or internal processing error.

Croydon (South London News) July 20, 2026 –Croydon, Hackney, Lewisham and Wandsworth—have spent thousands of pounds of taxpayers’ money to settle parking and traffic fines incurred by their own staff and contractors, even as they publicly backed stricter enforcement and higher charges for members of the public.

Which London councils paid staff parking fines with public money, and how much was spent?

As reported by the news desk of The Telegraph, authorities in Hackney, Lewisham, Wandsworth and Croydon used public funds to settle penalty charge notices (PCNs) and other road-traffic penalties “over several years”, while also supporting higher fines for the public who broke the rules.

Hackney council spent £10,250 on 96 parking and traffic penalties incurred by workers in the past financial year, with more than half (£6,060) going to Transport for London and a third (£3,215) to fines issued by Waltham Forest enforcement teams. In Lewisham, £15,350 was spent settling 40 PCNs racked up by staff and contractors between May 2024 and December 2025, the latest period for which figures are available.

At Wandsworth, staff and contractors incurred £10,040 in PCNs and other penalties from January 2023 to March 2026, with the council saying it “settled all these charges using procurement cards”.

In Croydon, where taxpayers’ money paid £3,244 in parking fines and other vehicle penalties, the figures cover January 2023 to March 2025, the latest period available.

How did the councils explain paying fines they are meant to enforce against others?

As reported by a Wandsworth council spokesperson to The Telegraph, the payments were made to secure an early-payment discount, and that money was recovered from the vehicle’s driver if they were found to be at fault. The spokesperson did not specify how often those payments were claimed from ticketed staff, according to the report. In Hackney, Councillor Jacob Cable, cabinet member for climate, clean air, energy and transport, said:

“The Council’s drivers are personally responsible for paying [PCNs] incurred during their work. I can reassure you that PCNs incurred from council vehicles are not ‘passed on to the taxpayer’.”

He added that the council only covers costs in rare, exceptional cases, such as during an emergency response, due to an internal processing error, or where it is not possible to reclaim the cost from a former staff member, and that the £10,000 figure represented a small fraction of total PCNs, with 96% of fines paid by drivers personally.

What did Croydon’s mayor say about illegal parking, and how does that sit with the spending?

As reported by Inside Croydon, Croydon Mayor Jason Perry last year said:

“Croydon will no longer be seen as a soft touch or a place where people can commit antisocial acts without consequence,”

adding:

“If you do not pay your way, expect your car to be towed away.”

The same report notes that, under Perry—who has been mayor since May 2022—the council nonetheless settled £3,244 in staff and contractor fines between January 2023 and March 2025. The Telegraph’s coverage similarly records that in Croydon taxpayers’ money paid £3,244 in parking fines and other vehicle penalties while Perry launched a crackdown on illegally abandoned cars.

How reliable are the published figures, and what do they omit?

As reported by The Telegraph, its numbers are based “on available spending records, which are published inconsistently”.

The paper notes that some councils disclose only purchase-card payments above £250, while others publish smaller transactions but have not released recent figures, and that several councils disclosed PCN payments only after Freedom of Information requests.

Inside Croydon adds that even the disclosed amounts “may be low-balling” what was forked out, because councils, including Croydon, “fail to be entirely transparent about their spending”.

The London Standard reports the same four councils—Hackney, Lewisham, Wandsworth and Croydon—spent thousands on fines for staff and contractors, reinforcing the scale of the practice across party lines and administrations.

LBC likewise reports that authorities in the four boroughs spent thousands of pounds on PCNs, underscoring that the issue spans multiple local authorities.

Which other councils have faced similar scrutiny, and what practices were reported?

As reported by the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS) via the London Standard, Hounslow Council paid itself hundreds of pounds for a range of parking and driving fines in the borough between April 2025 and March 2026, effectively letting off workers who flouted rules that members of the public would have had to pay a penalty for.

In some cases the council appears to have used taxpayer money to pay penalties issued to third parties working on behalf of the authority, with fines charged to the service within the council where the offending employee works. Hounslow Council says it is

“for the service to recover the cost from the driver of the vehicle”,

but there appears to be no specific direction that this has to happen, and in one instance the council used its own funds because a fine was issued while the employee was working.

The FOI also uncovered instances in which receipts for employee expenses were lost but the costs were still covered, and one council employee was fined £160 in private parking charges whilst carrying out their job, with management concluding the driver

“reasonably believed their permits covered the locations in question and were therefore not at fault”,

So the taxpayer covered the cost.

Explore More Local South London News

Women’s Health Hubs Transform Care in South East London, 2026

Poor Boys Kingston Uber Eats Award Finalist, South London 2026

Background: How did this practice develop and what rules govern council enforcement?

Civil enforcement of parking contraventions in England is set out in statutory guidance for local authorities, which requires councils to operate enforcement schemes fairly and consistently, with clear policies on issuing and recovering PCNs.

Over time, many councils have adopted procurement or corporate cards to settle charges quickly to secure early-payment discounts, then seek internal recovery from the responsible driver or service; however, the degree of transparency and the rigour of recovery processes vary, as seen in the inconsistent publication of spending records and the reliance on FOI disclosures.

The practice has drawn scrutiny because councils are also the bodies setting and collecting PCNs from the public, creating a perceived double standard when public funds are used to settle staff penalties, even where policies state that drivers are personally responsible.

Prediction: How could this affect residents, drivers and local accountability?

If councils tighten disclosure and recovery practices following this reporting, residents may see clearer accounts of how public money is used and more consistent enforcement of “driver pays” policies, potentially reducing future use of taxpayers’ cash for staff fines.

For drivers in these boroughs, the reputational impact could increase pressure on councils to apply the same standards to staff as to the public, which may harden enforcement attitudes or, conversely, prompt reviews of whether current fine levels and processes are proportionate.

For local accountability, the episode is likely to fuel demands for standardised reporting of PCN settlements across London, so that residents can assess whether councils are meeting their own rules on recovery and whether exceptions—such as emergency response or processing errors—are being applied narrowly and transparently.