Voluntary Penalty Ticket

(Non-Statutory Bylaw Ticket)

Author: Michael Tillmann

Published: February 13, 2026

Last updated: February 14, 2026

Quick Answers

• What they are:
  Tickets created by local government bylaws that offer payment of a “voluntary penalty” instead of immediately commencing prosecution.

• Statutory basis:
  Not expressly authorized by provincial ticketing legislation. They operate outside the statutory MTI and Bylaw Notice regimes.

• Do they start court proceedings?
  No. Court proceedings begin only if the local government later lays an information under the Offence Act.

• Is payment legally mandatory?
  The penalty is described as “voluntary.” However, non-payment may lead to further enforcement action.

• What happens if you ignore one?
  In practice, some local governments refer unpaid voluntary penalties to collection agencies rather than immediately commencing prosecution. This may result in collection efforts despite the absence of a court judgment.

• Does non-payment automatically create a debt?
  There is no express provincial statute that automatically converts an unpaid voluntary penalty into a civil debt. However, enforcement practices vary, and some local governments refer these penalties to debt collectors if they remain unpaid.

• How are they different from MTIs or Bylaw Notices?
  They are not governed by the Community Charter or the Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, and they do not have the same prescribed dispute, service, or collection mechanisms.

• Common use:
  Historically associated with parking enforcement.

Table of Contents

• Introduction

• History

• Legal Foundation

• Distinction from Statutory Tickets

• Notices of Bylaw Infraction

• Enforcement Practices and Legal Questions

• Contemporary Relevance

• Conclusion

• End Notes

• References

Introduction

In addition to Municipal Ticket Informations (MTIs) and Bylaw Notices, some local governments in British Columbia continue to use a third, less formal ticketing mechanism. These tickets[1] are not expressly authorized by provincial statute. Instead, they are created by local government bylaws and typically provide for the payment of a “voluntary penalty” in lieu of prosecution. In many ways, they resemble demand letters[2] used by litigants in civil law disputes, where one party will send a letter to another party asking for the voluntary payment of a sum of money to avoid or terminate a lawsuit.

Within the bylaw enforcement community, such tickets are sometimes referred to informally as “love notes.” This article refers to them as voluntary penalty tickets or non-statutory bylaw tickets to distinguish them from statutorily authorized enforcement tools.

Although the use of these tickets predates modern ticketing systems, more than one local government continues to use them despite the availability of MTIs and Bylaw Notices.

History

Prior to the introduction of the MTI regime in 1989, local governments seeking to impose fines for bylaw violations were generally required to initiate prosecution by laying a long form information under the Offence Act (Offence Act, 1996). This required court involvement at the outset (Howieson, 2008, pp. 8-10).

To streamline enforcement, some local governments enacted bylaws authorizing the issuance of tickets offering alleged offenders the opportunity to pay a stated “voluntary penalty” to avoid prosecution. If payment was made, no information would be laid. If payment was not made, the local government retained the authority to commence proceedings in court.

These systems were commonly used for parking enforcement.

Subsequent statutory reforms introduced the MTI system under the Community Charter and later the Bylaw Notice system under the Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, both of which created structured, province-wide ticketing regimes.

Legal Foundation

Voluntary penalty tickets are not expressly created by provincial legislation. Their legal foundation appears to rest on:

1. A local government’s authority to enact bylaws imposing fines for contraventions (Community Charter, 2003, s. 263); and

2. A local government’s authority to prosecute bylaw offences in court under the Offence Act (Offence Act, 1996).

Under this model, the voluntary penalty functions as an administrative alternative to prosecution. If paid, the matter ends. If unpaid, prosecution may be initiated.

When used in this manner, the mechanism can be understood as an exercise of prosecutorial discretion rather than as a distinct statutory enforcement tool.

However, because there is no legislative framework governing their issuance, service, dispute process, or collection, their operation depends entirely on the authorizing bylaw and subsequent enforcement decisions.

Distinction from Statutory Tickets

Voluntary penalty tickets differ materially from MTIs and Bylaw Notices.

Municipal Ticket Informations (MTIs) are expressly authorized under the Community Charter (Community Charter, 2003, s. 264) and related regulations. Issuing an MTI initiates quasi-criminal proceedings immediately and triggers prescribed dispute and hearing processes.

Bylaw Notices, created under the Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003), have a screening and adjudication system distinct from court prosecution and clear statutory authority exists for service methods, including leaving notices on vehicles.

Voluntary penalty tickets:

• Do not automatically commence proceedings;

• Have no prescribed format;

• Do not have an established statutory dispute mechanism; and

• Do not expressly create a collectible debt upon non-payment.

Notices of Bylaw Infraction

Some local governments use a document titled “Notice of Bylaw Infraction" and it is also a form of voluntary penalty ticket.

A prescribed form for such Notices of Bylaw Infraction appears in provincial regulation (B.C. Reg. 425/2003, Form B.3). However, there is no express statutory provision creating a comprehensive enforcement scheme for these notices comparable to the MTI regime under the Community Charter or the adjudication system under the Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act.

As a result, Notices of Bylaw Infraction are best understood as a standardized version of the voluntary penalty model. They offer recipients the option of payment of a stated amount to avoid prosecution but do not themselves commence court proceedings.

Their legal foundation therefore appears to rest, as with other voluntary penalty tickets, on a local government’s authority to prosecute bylaw offences under the Offence Act (Community Charter, 2003, s. 263).

Enforcement Practices and

Legal Questions

In principle, voluntary penalty tickets operate as an optional settlement mechanism. Non-payment may result in prosecution under the Offence Act, at which point liability must be proven in court.

In practice, enforcement approaches may vary. In some jurisdictions, unpaid voluntary penalties are referred to collection agencies rather than immediately proceeding by way of prosecution. This may expose recipients to collection efforts even though no court judgment has been entered.

An MTI becomes due and payable under the Community Charter if a recipient is convicted at trial or if the person fails to respond to the MTI within a set period of time (Community Charter, 2003, ss. 270-271). Similarly, the Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act provides that a Bylaw Notice becomes due and payable if the recipient either is found liable in an adjudication hearing, or if the recipient fails to respond to the ticket within the prescribed time period (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 9). In contrast, provincial statutes and regulations are silent on how voluntary penalty tickets, and their associated monetary penalties, should be dealt with.

Because there is no express provincial provision deeming unpaid voluntary penalties to be civil debts, the legal basis for collection practices is not clearly articulated in provincial legislation.

Additionally, recipients may not always distinguish between voluntary penalty tickets and statutorily authorized instruments such as MTIs or Bylaw Notices. Without clear explanation, there is potential for misunderstanding regarding legal obligations and consequences.

These issues reflect the absence of a defined legislative framework governing voluntary penalty systems.

Contemporary Relevance

Despite the availability of MTIs and Bylaw Notices, voluntary penalty systems — including Notices of Bylaw Infraction — remain in use in some jurisdictions.

The development of modern statutory ticketing regimes has provided clearer procedural safeguards, defined service methods, and express collection mechanisms. For this reason, many local governments now prefer statutorily authorized systems.

Voluntary penalty tickets, however, continue to exist as part of the historical and practical landscape of bylaw enforcement in British Columbia.

Conclusion

Voluntary penalty tickets, including Notices of Bylaw Infraction, represent an enforcement model that operates outside modern statutory ticketing frameworks.

When used strictly as an alternative to prosecution, they may function as an administrative exercise of discretion. However, because they are not expressly governed by a defined provincial enforcement regime, their procedural structure and enforcement consequences are less clearly articulated than those of MTIs or Bylaw Notices.

Understanding their legal foundation, practical operation, and potential collection consequences is important for anyone involved in bylaw enforcement or municipal governance.

END NOTES

[1] It may be argued by some that voluntary penalty tickets are not actual tickets, since they are not expressly authorized by statute, but if one looks to the dictionary definitions for the word 'ticket', they do qualify. The Wordnik online dictionary has a list of multiple meanings for the word 'ticket', one of those being: "A legal notice to a person charged with a violation of law, especially a minor violation" (Wordnik, n.d.). Likewise, the Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines a ticket as having multiple different meanings, including "a summons or warning issued to a traffic-law violator" (Merriam-Webster, n.d.).

[2] A demand letter is a document sent by one person to another person alleging that a law has been broken, or legal rights infringed, and demanding that the other person do something or stop doing something - for example, stop breaking the law or pay an amount of money that is owed - in order to avoid legal action (TheLawDictionary.org, n.d.).

REFERENCES

B.C. Reg. 425/2003. https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/425_2003

Community Charter, SBC 2003, c. 26. https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/03026_00

Government of British Columbia. (2023, December 7). Municipal Ticketing. Province of British Columbia. https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/governments/local-governments/governance-powers/bylaws/bylaw-enforcement/municipal-ticketing

Howieson, D. (2008, November 28). Investigating and Enforcing Bylaws [Seminar Paper]. Young, Anderson Barristers & Solicitors. https://www.younganderson.ca/images/seminar_blogs/Investigating_and_Enforcing_Bylaws.pdf

Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, SBC 2003, c. 60. https://canlii.ca/t/jjk1

Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Ticket. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved February 14, 2026 from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ticket

Offence Act, RSBC 1996, c. 338. https://canlii.ca/t/54cb4

TheLawDictionary.org. (n.d.). What is a demand letter? In TheLawDictionary.org dictionary. Retrieved February 14, 2026 from https://thelawdictionary.org/article/how-to-respond-to-a-legal-demand-letter/

Wordnik. (n.d.) Ticket. In Wordnik dictionary. Retrieved February 24, 2024 from https://www.wordnik.com/words/ticket