A motorist has won an appeal against his Mersey Gateway fine in a landmark ruling – which could affect all appeals against penalty charge notices issued on the bridge.

Robert Tollman successfully fought his appeal on the ground that he did not see 'clear signage'.

Mr Tollman received a £20 fine after crossing the bridge on a journey from St Helens to his hometown in South Wales on October 16.

He explained that it was his first time using the Mersey Gateway and he expected to pay the £2 crossing fee at a toll booth after seeing signs saying 'tolls ahead'.

But when the high school teacher didn't spot any booths, he thought they must not have been set up yet as the bridge was only opened two days before.

However, upon seeing a secondary sign on 'how to pay' while in slow-moving traffic on another journey across the bridge two weeks later, he immediately followed the instructions to pay for both of his journeys, the Liverpool Echo reports.

But he was slapped with a £30 fine on October 31 for missing the deadline to pay the toll, which he decided to appeal.

And this is how he did it.

In a letter to Merseyflow - the bridge toll operating company - Mr Tollman, 43, wrote: “I am attaching this letter of evidence to appeal the Penalty Charge Notice XM00093312, issued on 31/10/2017 as I am sure you appreciate, that 1000 characters should not be an imposed limit, when dealing with potentially judicious matters.

“This relates to a charge made on a return journey on Oct 16 to South Wales and my first use of the bridge (as on my outward journey on Oct 13 the bridge was not open) from the St Helen’s area.

“While signs for toll charges were clear, signs for methods of payment were not.

“While paying due care and attention to my driving, these secondary signs, if present at all, were not apparent.

“I was fully expecting to come across a toll booth (particularly as the charge signs state “Tolls ahead”) and in not encountering one, assumed that as the bridge was new, these had not yet been installed.

“It is only on a subsequent journey across the bridge on Oct 31, a fortnight later, that slow-moving traffic allowed me to view a secondary ‘how to pay’ sign and an opportunity to memorise the name of the bridge and the website to use. “Immediately on learning this, I logged on and made the payments required. I also did this for my girlfriend who, despite being local to the area, had used the bridge the day previous and like me, failed to spot the secondary ‘how to pay’ signs.

“The payment reference number is 1001034683.

Video Loading

“It is my understanding that as of today (Nov 6) some new signs have been put up, thus, acknowledging the lack of clarity and visibility of the initial signage.

“I am sure you appreciate that to seek payment within one full day of crossing when, as a new project, tolls and their methods of payment are not apparent to the majority of drivers, this is not a ‘reasonable’ time for payment.

“As demonstrated, I have paid the due toll at the first available opportunity on becoming aware of the procedure.

“I therefore move that this PCN should be dismissed for the reasons stated.”

Merseyflow revealed last week that 50,000 penalty notices have been issued to drivers - in the first month of the Mersey Gateway bridge opening.

The minimum fine is £20, which if 50,000 people paid, Mersey Gateway bosses would have this month raked in more than £1m - but this figure could be as high as £3m - depending on the fine charge.

But after a landmark ruling from Merseyflow, which said it had chosen to ‘apply their discretion and accept Rob’s representation’ - a lot of other drivers may have their fines quashed.

A letter, in response Mr Tollman, from Merseyflow, said: “Notice of acceptance.

“Thank you for your recent representation against the issue of the above mentioned penalty charge notice.

“Following a review, the representation has been accepted and we have cancelled the PCN.

“To avoid receipt of a PCN individuals are required to make payment before midnight the day following making a crossing.

“The receipt for this charge payment clearly shows that it was made late, resulting in the valid issue of the PCN.

“On this occasion, however, we have chosen to apply our discretion and accept your representation.

“We have reconciled the late payment to the outstanding crossing.

“No further action will be taken in respect of the above-mentioned PCN’s however, should you pay the charge incorrectly again, we will be unable to cancel any PCNs issued as a result.”

'More discretion needed'

Mr Tollman said: “I am obviously happy that they have seen sense and this proves that their signs were clearly not adequate, but my heart goes out to all the other people, who they have not seen sense for.

“If I think I have done wrong fair play, but I was genuinely surprised to get this fine.

“The project is new and I think they need to use a bit of discretion and see some sense.

“24 hours is not long enough to give people to pay - a week would be far more sensible.

“Not many people will have ever heard of paying ‘retrospectively’.

“I won’t be the only one who has been caught out by this.

“And I suspect someone will end up going to court over one of these fines.

“I’m just glad that it is not me!”