After Alistair Darling announced a £1.2 billion increase in road tax in the Budget, drivers might have hoped for a period of respite from higher motoring costs. But new parking regulations that come into force on Monday look set to increase the financial pressure on car owners by giving local authorities extra powers to fine drivers for minor infringements.

Amendments to the Road Traffic Act 1991 and the Traffic Management Act 2004 will give parking attendants the power to issue tickets through the post. It will also allow councils to use CCTV to detect parking infringements and other minor traffic offences, such as turning left or right at junctions with restricted turns.

At present, a parking ticket is only valid if the attendant hands it to the driver or places it on the windscreen of a car. The new rule allowing attendants to issue tickets through the post is designed to stop motorists from driving off when a warden is filling out a ticket, but critics are worried that the policy will encourage bad practice and make appealing against unfair or invalid tickets even harder.

Barrie Segal, parking campaigner and founder of appealnow.com, says that the problem with tickets sent in the post is that it makes it harder for drivers to gather contemporaneous evidence to prove that they were not at fault.

“Another problem is that postal tickets will be considered the equivalent of a Notice to Owner, withdrawing the opportunity for drivers to make an informal appeal to the council if the ticket has been issued in error,” he says.

“If the parking ticket never arrives - and, according to Postwatch, more than 14 million items of post go missing each year - the driver will not know that he or she has committed an offence until the Charge Notice is issued, at which stage there is no right to appeal and the cost of the ticket doubles.”

Mr Segal is also concerned that allowing wardens to issue tickets in the post will encourage false, or “ghost”, tickets. He says: “Many unscrupulous wardens already send fabricated tickets to innocent motorists as an easy way to meet performance targets. A quarter of the drivers who approach my website for help are victims of these ghost tickets. These wardens exploit the fact that many drivers will rather pay an unfair ticket than go through the appeals process. Inevitably, allowing postal tickets will encourage this bad practice.”

Motoring groups are also concerned about local councils using CCTV to issue tickets for parking offences. From April 1 any town-centre CCTV currently used to monitor security can be switched around to parking control.

Edmund King, president of the AA, expects there to be a surge in the number of tickets issued as a result of this change. He says: “Unfortunately, with councils able to keep the revenue raised, drivers must expect many more tickets. The problem with CCTV is that the film stills used as evidence can easily be taken out of context.

“In London, where councils are already allowed to use CCTV to monitor parking, we have seen tickets issued to motorists stopping to read maps or dropping off passengers. And how CCTV will pick up blue disabled badges we do not know.”

There is also concern about allowing councils to use CCTV to fine motorists for minor traffic offences. Paul Watters, head of roads and transport policy at the AA, expects there to be an increase in the number of cameras monitoring bus lanes. He says: “Using CCTV for moving traffic offences is not flexible enough. Traffic flow is not black and white, there are grey areas. For example, a CCTV still will not show that the reason a driver pulled into a bus lane was to let an ambulance through. In London we have already had cases where drivers have been fined for turning across a bus lane to enter their own premises.”

The AA is also sceptical about the changes to the structure of parking fines. From April 1 fines for “less serious” offences are falling, but the fines for “more serious” offences are increasing. Outside London the fine for a more serious offence will rise to £70, but the cost of a less serious offence will fall to £50. The 50 per cent discount for prompt payment will remain. In London a more serious offence will cost £120 and a less serious offence will cost £80.

Mr Watters says: “This might sound a sensible change, but the problem is that most offences fall into the ‘more serious' category. For example, parking on a single yellow line in a quiet residential street is considered a ‘more serious' offence.”

Other offences considered more serious include parking more than 50cm from the kerb, parking adjacent to a dropped kerb and stopping outside a school. Overstaying a payment meter and failing to display a valid pay-and-display ticket both fall into the less serious category.

The Department for Transport defends these new rules by insisting that they are not about allowing councils to raise more money but are designed to improve traffic flow.

Rosie Winterton, the Transport Minister, says: “Parking enforcement must be fair, clear, consistent and based on robust evidence. We want to increase public confidence in parking. Parking rules exist to help to beat congestion and improve road safety. With more than 30 million vehicles on our roads, one vehicle parked in the wrong place can cause a jam.”

The new rules state that clamping should normally be used only for persistent offenders. In other cases, it cannot take place for 30 minutes after the penalty is incurred. If a driver returns while his car is being clamped, it should be released unless the clamp is secured or all wheels are on the towtruck.

In addition, if a local authority rejects a driver's appeal against a ticket, it should offer the 50 per cent discount for 14 more days.

CASE STUDY: Motorist wins on a technicality

Nigel Head, a 66-year-old retired dentist from Maida Vale, northwest London, appealed to the Parking Adjudicator after his car was towed away by Westminster City Council.

Mr Head, left, says: “I left my car on a single yellow line near my home one Friday evening. That was perfectly legal, but unfortunately I had an awful night's sleep because of health problems, so I did not manage to get up to move it before the restrictions came into force at 8.30am the next morning.”

He then had to go to Westminster council's pound in Park Lane and pay £200 to get his car back. After the council refused to show discretion and turned down his appeal, he took his case to the adjudicator. “I argued that it was a single yellow line on a quiet residential street on a Saturday morning - there was clearly no obstruction so it was unreasonable to remove the car,” he says.

However, it was not common sense or compassion that helped Mr Head to win his case. “Westminster council failed to produce all the correct paperwork so the adjudicator dismissed the case and gave me my money back,” he explains. “It seemed absurd to win on a technicality but it is a judicial process and the council failed to treat it with the respect it deserves so it was right that it lost.”

How to appeal against a parking ticket

The first step is to post or e-mail a written appeal to your council. If your ticket is unreasonable or unfair, it is worth appealing even if you have committed the offence because councils should show discretion if there are mitigating circumstances.

If the council rejects your appeal, you have 28 days to pay the charge or appeal to the Parking Adjudicator. The council should send you the correct appeal form.

Don't be put off. More than half of all appeals that go before the adjudicator are won by the motorist. In London it is two thirds.

Costs are rarely awarded because the adjudicator must prove that the appeal or the ticket was completely unreasonable or vexatious.

The adjudicator is not allowed to show discretion, so there are only limited grounds under which you can appeal. However, the adjudicator can ask councils to reconsider unfair fines.

When the office of the adjudicator receives your appeal, it will write back to confirm the date of your personal hearing, or the date that your postal appeal is likely to be considered. The council should send you evidence of its case against you before your personal hearing.

The hearing is informal and conducted over a desk in a normal office. Only you, the adjudicator and possibly a representative of the council are likely to be present.

The adjudicator will explain his or her decision at the hearing or by post. The decision is binding with no automatic right of appeal.

Read The ten craziest parking tickets of all time