Jack Foot with his ticket issued in January and dated for October 22, 2015.

A Wellington teenager issued with a motoring ticket from the future has had to fight for five months to avoid paying it in the here and now.

Jack Foot, 19, admits he was in breach of his restricted licence when he was pinged with a $100 fine in Taranaki St for having an unauthorised passenger in his car on January 22.

But the police officer who issued the ticket dated it for October 22, 2015 – which Foot argued should make it invalid.

He wrote to police pointing out the error, but says he was ignored. Instead, a letter arrived in May for a court fine of $130.

Jack then appealed to the fines department of Wellington District Court. But it was knocked back on the basis that his evidence "did not prove anything went wrong in the process".

Shortly afterwards, another police officer took his licence off him, because the disputed ticket took him over 100 demerit points.

Mum Kate said that officer also told him it was "immoral" that he had appealed against the wrongly dated ticket. "My son responded that it was not a matter of morality."

The suspension of his licence left him facing a "double jeopardy", she said.

If he withdrew his appeal, his three-month suspension would end in six weeks and he could apply for a new licence, with all existing demerit points wiped.

But if he continued with the appeal, and won, he would get his existing licence back, minus the 35 latest demerit points, but keeping 70 previous ones incurred for similar breaches.

A Ministry of Justice spokesman said on Wednesday that, when there was a "minor error" in details on a ticket, "it does not invalidate the infringement fine".

However, in the same month that Foot had his licence suspended, police decided to cancel more than $150,000 in fines issued to almost 1800 drivers snapped speeding by the Ngauranga Gorge camera, because the time stamp on the images was out by an hour.

At the time, police said it was "a priority for police that all the notices we issue are fair, accurate and correct. Therefore it was an easy decision for us to waive these notices and refund anyone who has already paid."

"When I heard of that, that was a bit of a punch in the guts," Foot said.

Then, on Wednesday night – after questions were asked about the case – police announced they would waive the ticket.

Police had reviewed the infringement notice and "given our mistake, we apologise to Mr Foot and will be waiving the fine".

"In addition to the incorrect date on the original notice, in attempting to follow up with Mr Foot in writing, which is legally required, we also made an administrative error in sending our response to his former physical address, which was no longer current, instead of his PO box," a spokesman said.

But Kate Foot said the apology and waiver was just a start, and she and her son expected more.

"We want the police to co-ordinate the return of Jack's licence so we are not inconvenienced any more. We expect them to make sure there is no permanent scar on his driving record because, if he wants to get a heavy vehicle driver licence, a slur will put an end to that.

"And since he hasn't been able to drive since police took his licence away, are they going to give him any reparation?"

RESTRICTED LICENCE TERMS

- To get a restricted licence, drivers must be aged at least aged 16½, and have held a learner licence for at least six months.

- They can drive solo but only between 5am and 10pm.

- They may carry passengers only if those passengers have had a full licence for two years. There are some family exceptions that can be made.

* Comments are now closed on this article.