B.C. driver received Impark ticket in error, but was still being asked to pay

Click to play video: 'Consumer Matters: Woman reports trouble fighting Impark ticket' Consumer Matters: Woman reports trouble fighting Impark ticket
Our Consumer Matters reporter Anne Drewa has the story of a woman who says she got no satisfaction from Impark when she tried to deal with a ticket – Mar 5, 2018

A B.C. driver said she received a parking infraction from Impark for a vehicle whose licence plate wasn’t connected to her.

But she was still asked to pay.

Coverage of Consumer Matters on

Sylvia Sun said that in September 2017, she received an $85 parking infraction notice for a vehicle in violation at a Richmond Impark lot.

Story continues below advertisement

Sun, who is an ESL student, said she tried to call parking management repeatedly and even sent letters to resolve the issue, but according to her, she was dismissed.

“I was very worried. I think I am a polite person and I don’t want to break the law,” Sun said.

Frustrated, Sun asked her English teacher Sue Pahl for assistance.

“We tried many, many times to phone Impark and their customer service line, but every time we got a recorded answer saying they were receiving an unusual high volume of calls,” said Pahl.

Sun received a letter from a collection agency two months later.

She contacted ICBC and the corporation wrote a letter on Sun’s behalf confirming the licence plate on the ticket had been cancelled on May 25, 2017, months before the supposed parking infraction dated Sept. 19, 2017.

READ MORE: Parking tickets – which ones you must pay and which ones you don’t

Still, Sun and Pahl said they were no closer to a resolution.

“We got no response,” Pahl said.

Global BC’s Consumer Matters reached out to Impark.

Story continues below advertisement

Sun later received a letter from Impark stating:

“The violation notice has been cancelled. You will not be contacted by any collection agency and there is no risk to your credit rating.”

Still, Pahl said Impark’s response wasn’t good enough.

“The fact that Impark was unwilling to communicate with Sylvia at all during the process and it wasn’t until you people [Consumer Matters] got involved that they finally sent us a very minimal information letter, I think that’s inexcusable,” Pahl said.

Consumer Matters reached out to Impark a second time asking the company to explain why a ticket was initially issued to Sun.

Impark replied via email, saying it could could not discuss the particulars of any payment notice.

Sponsored content