Teenager fined $360 for parking ticket issued before he owned car
Wednesday, 8 July 2026
Landon Barr was sent a $360 demand from Traffic Monitoring Services (TMS) for an overdue parking fine issued three weeks before he bought the car.
Barr believed he needed to provide a signed statutory declaration and the previous owner's contact details to get the fine wiped, or potentially face debt collectors.
The previous owner was a traveller who had reportedly returned to Italy, and Barr was days away from moving overseas, leaving him no time to chase the details.
After Stuff contacted TMS to investigate, the parking company confirmed the fine would be waived and they would not pursue the debt any further.
Solving stuff is where we investigate reader complaints and push for answers. You can read more about the project here, and submit your story for consideration at the end of the article.
In this instalment: Landon Barr was fined $360 for an unpaid parking fine. But as Natalie Akoorie reports, the teenager didn’t own the car when the infringement notice was issued.
The problem
Landon Barr was fined $360 for an outstanding parking infringement on a car he used to own.
The problem is the 18-year-old didn’t own the car at the time the notice was issued.
The 2001 Suzuki Alto attracted the fine on December 1 last year - three weeks before Barr bought it.
“I bought the vehicle late December,” he explained. “I got it for a cheap price so I was just going to fix it up and then sell it again.”
Which was what Barr did.
He paid $1100 for the car, cleaned and polished it, and sold it for about $1500.
Two days after Barr bought it, the previous owner updated the ownership details to show he no longer owned it.
But because Barr wasn’t driving the car while he spruced it up, he only registered it in his name shortly before he sold it, in early February this year.
What went wrong
In late June, Barr received an unexpected letter from Traffic Monitoring Services.
“It was an overdue parking fine for the 1st of December, which was 20 days before I purchased the car,” Barr said.
In the letter dated June 8, 2026, seen by Stuff, Traffic Monitoring Services (TMS) said a fine of $280 was issued and affixed to the car at 31 Cook St in downtown Auckland on December 1, 2025.
“Despite notice being issued requesting the payment, our records show that, to date, payment has not been received,” the letter stated.
“In order to pursue the outstanding amount, additional costs of $80 have been incurred, which has been added to the total amount due pursuant to the terms and conditions of the car park entry, subject to the below.”
The letter went on to state that if another person was driving the vehicle at the time with Barr’s authority, he needed to provide a statutory declaration including the name and current address details of that driver.
If the car was being driven by someone else without his authority, Barr had to provide evidence to support that.
If TMS accepted one of those scenarios, it would pursue the other driver and not Barr, the letter said.
Otherwise, failure to pay the overdue $360 might result in the matter being referred to TMS’ lawyers or a recovery agent.
“I didn’t own the car and I only just got the notice so I don’t know why it’s been six months overdue,” Barr said.
So he rang TMS to explain.
He said he was told he still needed to provide a statutory declaration signed by a Justice of the Peace (JP), and also provide the previous owner’s address and contact details.
Barr said the previous owner was Italian and as far as he knew the man, who had been travelling around New Zealand in the Alto, returned to Italy after selling the car.
Barr did not know the man’s contact details and what’s more, he was about to embark on his own Overseas Experience (OE) and didn’t have time to compile the information TMS required to wipe the debt.
“I don’t understand why it’s my problem. How is it my responsibility to take time and effort to prove I did not own the vehicle at the time?”
He pointed out the registration details should have been available to TMS through the Motor Vehicle Register at the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA).
Barr, who was set to travel to Canada on Wednesday to begin work as a mountain bike hire assistant in Whistler, said he wanted the mess sorted out before he left the country.
What we did
Barr supplied Stuff with the Carjam report that showed the car’s ownership history by number rather than name, which correlated with his timeline.
Stuff rang TMS on Friday and spoke to a customer service representative who transferred the call to their manager, who did not answer.
We left a message, and received a call back from Tina Farmer, head of people and customer experience for TMS’ sister company Secure Parking, both of which have their ultimate holding company in Japan.
Farmer said she would investigate and come back to Stuff.
When we didn’t hear back we rang TMS on Tuesday and received a prompt call back from Farmer, who apologised for not being in touch sooner.
“The breach has been waived, just so you know,” she said.
She was unsure why TMS had Barr’s contact details as the registered owner at the time of the infringement.
Farmer said Barr would also not have had to provide the contact details of the previous owner.
“It’s ‘do you know the owner of the vehicle?’, not that you must provide it,” she said.
Farmer said they would not pursue the parking fine with the previous owner.
“We will just leave it at that.”
She said she had asked TMS to notify Barr the fine had been waived, however he was unaware when Stuff contacted him on Tuesday morning with the good news.
We also contacted the NZTA which queried whether Barr had completed the change of registered person form when he sold the vehicle.
Barr said he was 100% certain he had.
The NZTA website said the registered person of a vehicle was the person responsible for it, but this wasn’t the same thing as the legal owner.
It said the Motor Vehicle Register did not record legal ownership.
Did we solve it?
Yes. We got the breach and parking fine waived and the situation cleared up for Barr, who was ecstatic.
“Oh that’s so good,” he said. “I’m so stoked on that. That’s so, so huge.”
Barr said he was worried that if the debt wasn’t cleared up before he left to live overseas that it could affect his credit history in the future.
“That’s what my parents were saying. They were wondering if they were going to because obviously that would be a big stitch up in the long term.”
The news that the fine was no longer hanging over his head was very welcome.
“It’s so good - I don’t have to worry about it now and I can focus on moving to Canada now, which is so ideal.
“Thank you so much for this. It’s massive.”
The New Standard: If it’s unfair to you, it’s fair game for us.
Use the form below to tell us who is giving you the runaround. Or email natalie.akoorie@stuffdigital.co.nz