In April 2025, Kingston upon Thames Council increased parking charges across the borough. For some residents, the change was modest. For others, particularly those in controlled parking zones on the borough's fringes, the cost of a permit or a pay-and-display session appeared to triple.
The council says the increases are necessary, fair, and long overdue. More than 1,200 residents disagreed loudly enough to force a Full Council debate. So what actually happened, who was hit hardest, and what can you do about it?
Kingston Council revised its schedule of parking charges across pay-and-display bays, resident permit zones (CPZs), and visitor permit schemes. The stated aims were to bring charges in line with operational costs, reduce car use in line with the council's transport strategy, and generate income that can be reinvested in highways and transport.
The increases were not uniform. Town centre pay-and-display rates — already among the higher charges — rose by a smaller percentage. Some outer-ward CPZ permit fees, which had been comparatively low for years, saw far steeper proportional jumps. In practical terms, a resident permit in certain zones that previously cost around £50 per year moved to a figure significantly higher, with some households reporting increases that represented a tripling of what they had previously paid.
The council has not published a single consolidated ward-by-ward comparison table in an easily accessible format. That opacity is itself worth noting.
Officers and the cabinet member responsible for transport argued several points in defence of the increases.
First, that many charges had not been reviewed for several years and had fallen well behind inflation and the actual cost of administering and enforcing parking schemes.
Second, that pricing parking more accurately discourages unnecessary car journeys — an argument that aligns with Kingston's Climate Action Plan and its Local Implementation Plan for transport.
Third, that parking income contributes to the council's overall financial resilience. Kingston is navigating a projected four-year budget gap of £18 million under its Medium Term Financial Strategy running to 2030. With reserves standing at £14.2 million — less than the gap the council needs to close — every income stream is under scrutiny.
None of these arguments are inherently unreasonable. The problem is how they land on the ground.
A petition gathering more than 1,200 signatures was submitted to the council, triggering a Full Council debate under Kingston's petition scheme. The threshold for a debate is 1,000 signatures — so this crossed it comfortably.
Petitioners raised several specific concerns. Many came from residents in outer wards where public transport connections are weaker and car ownership is not a lifestyle choice but a practical necessity. The argument that higher charges will shift behaviour only holds if an alternative exists. In parts of Kingston's 19 wards — particularly those further from the town centre and rail links — it often does not.
Petitioners also challenged the process. Were residents properly consulted before charges were set? Were equalities impacts fully assessed, particularly for lower-income households and disabled residents who rely on their vehicles? Were small businesses near neighbourhood shopping parades consulted about the knock-on effect on customer footfall?
The Full Council debate took place, as required. Whether it produced any concrete changes to the charging schedule is a question residents should be pressing their councillors to answer directly.
Separately — and this is important — the council has indicated that a review of parking provision related to retail areas is ongoing. This affects pay-and-display bays near neighbourhood shopping parades and district centres outside the main town centre.
Small retailers have raised concerns that higher short-stay parking costs are deterring customers. If you park for 30 minutes to visit a local parade and the charge has jumped materially, you may simply choose not to stop. Over time, that changes footfall, and footfall changes whether independent shops survive.
The council has not published a timetable for when this retail parking review will conclude or what weight it will give to evidence from traders and residents. Given that full council elections are scheduled for 7 May 2026 — with all 48 councillors across 19 wards up for election — there is an obvious political incentive to resolve this before the campaign period begins. Whether that produces good policy or merely timely announcements is a different question.
If you have received a PCN and believe it was issued unfairly — including in circumstances where signage about new charges was unclear or inadequate — you have a formal right to challenge it.
Step one: Informal challenge. Within 28 days of the PCN being issued, you can write to Kingston Council's parking services team making an informal representation. If you pay within 14 days, the fine is reduced by 50% — but paying is an admission of liability, so if you intend to challenge, do not pay first.
Step two: Formal representation. If your informal challenge is rejected, you will receive a Notice to Owner. You then have 28 days to make a formal representation, setting out your grounds in writing.
Step three: Independent adjudication. If the council rejects your formal representation, you can appeal to the London Tribunals (the independent adjudication service for London PCNs) at no cost to you. The adjudicators are independent of the council. Their decisions are binding.
Useful grounds for challenge include: unclear or missing signage about charges; a genuine emergency; a council error on the PCN itself; or evidence that the traffic regulation order underpinning the restriction was not properly made.
Keep everything in writing and keep copies. Note the exact time, location, and any photographs you took at the scene.
The council's case for reviewing parking charges is not without merit. But the process raised legitimate questions that have not been fully answered in public.
Why were some zones hit with proportionally far larger increases than others? Was there a deliberate policy rationale, or did it reflect which charges happened to have drifted furthest from current rates?
What equalities impact assessment was carried out, and where can residents read it?
What specific commitments has the council made to improve public transport alternatives in the outer wards most affected before pricing residents out of their cars?
When will the retail parking review conclude, and will traders and residents have a genuine opportunity to shape its recommendations — or will they be presented with a fait accompli?
And critically: given the £18 million budget gap the council is working to close, how much of this increase is genuinely about transport policy, and how much is simply revenue generation dressed up in green language?
The residents who signed that petition demonstrated that organised, specific pressure works — it forced a Full Council debate. But a debate is only the beginning.
With 48 councillors standing for re-election across all 19 wards on 7 May 2026, your ward representatives are paying close attention to what residents are saying right now.
Use Council Clarity to message your Kingston councillors directly. Ask them where the retail parking review stands, what the ward-specific impact of the April 2025 changes has been, and what they personally are doing to ensure the next review is transparent and properly consulted. You don't need to attend a meeting or write a formal letter. A direct message through Council Clarity takes two minutes — and your councillors are required to respond.
Share this post
Want to have your say on this issue?
Contact your local councillor through Council Clarity. Your message becomes a public thread.
Message your councillor →Over 2,000 households on Kingston's housing register, ~40 family homes freed per year, and waits of up to 17 years. Here's what the numbers really mean.
accountabilityPhase 2 of the Cambridge Road Estate regeneration has been submitted. Here's what the timeline looks like, why the affordable housing figures matter, and how residents can have their say.
accountabilityKingston's special educational needs budget is haemorrhaging money — £13.1m overspent in 2025/26 alone. Here's what it means for families navigating the SEND system.