DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 96408--------------------------------------------------
Padstow Parking Charge - Paid at meter, No receipt given, screen
shot of debit, money not taken
DIR By: RT
Date: November 1, 2025, 5:08 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi, hoping for some help / advice - before I contact (should I
even?) Alliance Parking.
We parked in padstow car park for a little under an hour on
22/10. Before exiting, I paid at the machine on my debit card.
£1.50 debited my account.
I requested a receipt from the machine - it gave me nothing, and
returned to the opening screen for the next customer.
The chap at the harbour refused to provide any written notice of
receipt, and explained he was nothing to do with the parking
company, he viewed my banking app to see the debiting amount,
but insisted it was nothing to do with him, despite him placing
parking boards out from the little shack at the entrance.
I have a screen shot of the debiting amount from my phone.
I had a notification from my banking app on on 29/10 - stating
that Padstow Harbour didn't take the debit card payment. I have
a screen shot of this.
I was going to attempt to contact Padstow council on Friday, but
work prevented me from doing so, to try and pay them their
outstanding £1.50 that they didn't take, for whatever reason.
I have today received a letter from Alliance Parking stating
that the driver of the vehicle is liable for a parking charge.
With time of entry at 10:33 and exit of 11:32 on 22/10. My
screen shot shows 11:27 on 22/10 at point of payment. £100 is to
be paid by 27/11, or £170 thereafter. If prompt payment is made
the sum of £60 is payable before 17/11 in full and final
settlement.
Should I contact Alliance and offer the proof that payment was
'made' but not taken?
What's my best course of action - I really don't want to be
handing over any money to them, when to my mind, I paid at the
time, and the transaction wasn't taken - where I have no
interaction in that process.
any advice / steer would be greatly appreciated.
#Post#: 96410--------------------------------------------------
Re: Padstow Parking Charge - Paid at meter, No receipt given,
screen shot of debit, money not taken
DIR By: Dave65
Date: November 1, 2025, 5:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Do not attempt to call these people.
Everything in writing.
Do not divulge the ID of the driver.
This being a harbour, then most likely byelaws will be in place.
Can you post up a copy of the PPN with personal detail's
redacted but leave dates?
#Post#: 96414--------------------------------------------------
Re: Padstow Parking Charge - Paid at meter, No receipt given,
screen shot of debit, money not taken
DIR By: jfollows
Date: November 1, 2025, 6:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/<br
/>should answer some questions
#Post#: 96427--------------------------------------------------
Re: Padstow Parking Charge - Paid at meter, No receipt given,
screen shot of debit, money not taken
DIR By: RT
Date: November 1, 2025, 7:31 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the comments Dave - I'm not particularly tech savvy,
so think i've done the upload thing right - the picture of the
front of the letter is here:
HTML https://ibb.co/1Vxrg0V
The back is here
HTML https://ibb.co/8nYnvrkn
If these don't work, please let me know.
I haven't as yet replied - after reading through the FAQ's etc
on here - I can't particularly afford any of it, and somewhat
nervous about just leaving it and not responding at all, so
would appreciate some specific guidance. TIA
#Post#: 96466--------------------------------------------------
Re: Padstow Parking Charge - Paid at meter, No receipt given,
screen shot of debit, money not taken
DIR By: b789
Date: November 1, 2025, 2:20 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
DO NOT, under any circumstances, identify the driver. They only
know that you are the registered keeper. They have no idea who
the driver is unless you blab it to them inadvertently or
otherwise. ONLY the driver can be liable as the location is not
relevant land under PoFA 2012 and therefore you cannot be liable
as the Keeper. Also, their Notice to Keeper (NtK) doesn't seek
to even try and rely on PoFA to hold you liable as the Keeper.
There is no legal obligation on the known keeper (the recipient
of the Notice to Keeper (NtK)) to reveal the identity of the
unknown driver and no inference or assumptions can be made.
The NtK is not compliant with all the requirements of PoFA which
means that if the unknown driver is not identified, they cannot
transfer liability for the charge from the unknown driver to the
known keeper.
Use the following as your appeal. No need to embellish or remove
anything from it:
--- Quote ---
> I am the keeper of the vehicle and I dispute your 'parking
charge'. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I
will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your
client landowner.
>
> As your Notice to Keeper (NtK) does not fully comply with ALL
the requirements of PoFA 2012, you are unable to hold the keeper
of the vehicle liable for the charge. Partial or even
substantial compliance is not sufficient. There will be no
admission as to who was driving and no inference or assumptions
can be drawn. Alliance Parking has relied on contract law
allegations of breach against the driver only.
>
> The registered keeper cannot be presumed or inferred to have
been the driver, nor pursued under some twisted interpretation
of the law of agency. Your NtK can only hold the driver liable.
Alliance have no hope should you be so stupid as to try and
litigate, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of
time and cancel the PCN.
--- End Quote ---
Come back when they reject that.
#Post#: 96498--------------------------------------------------
Re: Padstow Parking Charge - Paid at meter, No receipt given,
screen shot of debit, money not taken
DIR By: RT
Date: November 2, 2025, 4:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: b789 link ---
>
> DO NOT, under any circumstances, identify the driver. They
only know that you are the registered keeper. They have no idea
who the driver is unless you blab it to them inadvertently or
otherwise. ONLY the driver can be liable as the location is not
relevant land under PoFA 2012 and therefore you cannot be liable
as the Keeper. Also, their Notice to Keeper (NtK) doesn't seek
to even try and rely on PoFA to hold you liable as the Keeper.
>
> There is no legal obligation on the known keeper (the
recipient of the Notice to Keeper (NtK)) to reveal the identity
of the unknown driver and no inference or assumptions can be
made.
>
> The NtK is not compliant with all the requirements of PoFA
which means that if the unknown driver is not identified, they
cannot transfer liability for the charge from the unknown driver
to the known keeper.
>
> Use the following as your appeal. No need to embellish or
remove anything from it:
>
> [quote]I am the keeper of the vehicle and I dispute your
'parking charge'. I deny any liability or contractual agreement
and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to
your client landowner.
>
> As your Notice to Keeper (NtK) does not fully comply with ALL
the requirements of PoFA 2012, you are unable to hold the keeper
of the vehicle liable for the charge. Partial or even
substantial compliance is not sufficient. There will be no
admission as to who was driving and no inference or assumptions
can be drawn. Alliance Parking has relied on contract law
allegations of breach against the driver only.
>
> The registered keeper cannot be presumed or inferred to have
been the driver, nor pursued under some twisted interpretation
of the law of agency. Your NtK can only hold the driver liable.
Alliance have no hope should you be so stupid as to try and
litigate, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of
time and cancel the PCN.
--- End Quote ---
Come back when they reject that.
[/quote]
Thanks for this B789. I'm not usually the type to poke the bear
but I shall indeed forward as is.
Couple of questions before I do so if you don't mind me asking,
just so I'm aware -
What's the end game? i.e. where does this lead in next steps.
Is it worth at this stage providing evidence of payment
attempted but not claimed?
I work for a financial institution, and I'm pretty well versed
in how point of sale transactions are processed. In this
instance, I paid using the debit card, that payment was
authorised by my bank and moved to 'pending' - removing those
funds from being available to me. The receipient (Padstow
Council) then needs to claim the funds, using the auth code
provided on the transaction.
This hasn't taken place, so the funds were moved from pending,
back into the available balance on my account. Indeed, the
notification from the bank about this clearly states that
"Padstow Harbour Commis didn't take your debit card payment" -
the onus being on the recipient to claim the funds once
authorised?
Thanks again for your help
#Post#: 96533--------------------------------------------------
Re: Padstow Parking Charge - Paid at meter, No receipt given,
screen shot of debit, money not taken
DIR By: b789
Date: November 2, 2025, 11:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The end game is that you do not have to pay a penny to anyone
for the PCN. You are now caught up in a scam. Do not think for
one minute that this unregulated private parking firm of
ex-clampers has any customer service ethos. Their only objective
is to get som money from you, most likely because you are
unaware of your rights and you are low-hanging fruit on the
gullible tree that can be intimidated into paying up out of
ignorance and fear.
As Alliance are IPC members, they are not going to give up
easily. Any initial appeal will be rejected, simply because
there is no money in it for them to accept it. The IAS is owned
by the same firm that owns the IPC. There is no "independent"
appeal. The IAS operates anonymously whilst claiming,
mendaciously, that their adjudicators are legally trained to
solicitor or even barrister level. They are not, but you have no
way of verifying this.
Once the appeals have been exhausted, they will resort to
sending useless debt recovery letters. You can safely ignore all
debt collectors. They are powerless to do anything. They are not
a party to the contract allegedly breached by the driver. They
have zero standing except to intimidate the ignorant and fearful
into capitulation. They cannot do anything. Ignore them. Never,
ever enter into communication with a powerless debt collector.
You can safely shred any correspondence from them and use it as
hamster bedding for all anyone cares.
They are most likely to going to go all the way to issue a
county court claim for an alleged debt. This is very good news.
It is their last attempt at scaring you into paying the charge.
They will use a bulk litigator and I can tell you with greater
than 99.9 certainly, that the claim will never reach a hearing.
There is no case to answer and the claim will be either struck
out or discontinued.
Here is why there can be no liability to you as the registered
keeper. South Quay car park is on land controlled by the Padstow
Harbour Commissioners and therefore falls under statutory
harbour control. As such it is not “relevant land” for the
purposes of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012,
so keeper liability under PoFA cannot be invoked there.
The Harbour Commissioners themselves record and manage “South
Quay Car Park, Padstow” (e.g. ANPR/pay-on-exit changes and site
works), confirming it is their site.
PHC’s published schedules explicitly list “SOUTH QUAY CAR PARK”
among their charges. The current Harbour Revision Order
documentation vests the Commissioners with statutory powers over
“parking places” and the “parking of vehicles” within the
port—i.e. the area is subject to statutory control, which
excludes it from PoFA “relevant land”.
As there is no legal obligation on the Keeper to identify the
driver to an unregulated private parking firm, the burden of
proof that the Keeper was the driver falls on the operator. How
do you imagine that could do that? Unless the Keeper identifies
the driver, they have no way of proving it. They are not allowed
to infer or assume.
Alliance’s NtK doesn’t rely on PoFA, therefore they cannot make
the keeper liable; they must prove, on evidence, that the keeper
was the driver. A legally embarrsing claim that “in the absence
of evidence to the contrary, the Keeper was the driver” reverses
the burden of proof and is legally incorrect. Courts have
repeatedly rejected that approach (e.g. VCS v Edward, 2023
HTML https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/zra61px7l3if53o3bp9c4/VCS-v-EDWARD-Transcript.pdf?rlkey=bv4bba389nau5qpfglqkpjq5l&st=mwerd19u&dl=0).<br
/>It’s open to a court to find a keeper was the driver on actual
evidence, but not by mere presumption.
This is something we deal with daily and we have a very high
success rate for anyone who follows the advice we give. If you
need a list of the reasons why the Keeper cannot be liable for
the charge:
[indent]• PoFA 2012, Sch.4 para 3(1)(c): “‘Relevant land’ means
any land … other than … any land on which the parking of a
vehicle is subject to statutory control.”
• PoFA 2012, Sch.4 para 3(3): Parking is “subject to statutory
control if any statutory provision imposes a liability (criminal
or civil, fee/charge or penalty) in respect of parking on that
land…”.
• Padstow Harbour Revision Order 1987, art. 17(m): The
Commissioners may make byelaws “for regulating the movement,
speed and parking of vehicles within the harbour estate.”
(Statutory control over parking.)
• Padstow HRO 1987, preliminaries: “Harbour estate” includes
roads, quays and lands vested in or occupied by the
Commissioners for the purposes of the Port (defining the area of
control).
• PHC Schedule of Rates (2024) – Addendum: Lists “SOUTH QUAY CAR
PARK / ROCK QUARRY CAR PARK / COMMISSIONERS QUAY, WADEBRIDGE”
with tariffs (i.e., the Commissioners operate/charge for South
Quay car park).
• Current HRO process (GOV.UK page): Confirms the MMO draft HRO
would continue/modernise statutory powers, including over
“parking places, vehicles” within the Port—underscoring the
existing statutory regime.[/indent]
So, for the initial appeal, what I have advised is all you need.
It clearly identifies the appellant as keeper only.
[indent]• Denies liability or contract formation.
• States non-compliance with PoFA in categorical terms.
• Refuses any inference about the driver’s identity.
• Highlights the absurdity of pursuing a non-driver under false
legal assumptions.[/indent]
Considering that the IAS is a kangaroo court, you can include
your evidence that payment for parking was duly authorised by
your bank for “Padstow Harbour Commis”; the merchant failed to
capture the authorised funds, and the authorisation expired, for
what it's worth (IAS approves less than 4% of appeals).
#Post#: 96568--------------------------------------------------
Re: Padstow Parking Charge - Paid at meter, No receipt given,
screen shot of debit, money not taken
DIR By: RT
Date: November 3, 2025, 1:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: b789 link ---
>
> The end game is that you do not have to pay a penny to anyone
for the PCN. . . . . .
>
--- End Quote ---
Thanks again for this b789. I shall duly respond today and no
doubt come back when/if they reject appeal accordingly.
#Post#: 96652--------------------------------------------------
Re: Padstow Parking Charge - Paid at meter, No receipt given,
screen shot of debit, money not taken
DIR By: RT
Date: November 3, 2025, 11:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: RT link ---
>
> [quote author=b789 link=topic=8610.msg96533#msg96533
date=1762104813]
> The end game is that you do not have to pay a penny to anyone
for the PCN. . . . . .
>
--- End Quote ---
Thanks again for this b789. I shall duly respond today and no
doubt come back when/if they reject appeal accordingly.
[/quote]
Interestingly, I submitted the 'Appeal' directly today to
info@alliance-parking.co.uk and received an auto response,
advising that appeals cannot be made via the mailbox. And that I
should raise the appeal directly at
www.alliance-parking.co.uk/appeals.
Clearly didn't read things right - the back of their charge
letter does state this. So . . .Off I go to 'appeal' again in
the correct place - duly entering my reference number and
vehicle reg - and I was greeted with this message:
HTML https://ibb.co/NnFcdW4Q
Now - I don't know if the 'appeal' sent to them via e-mail, was
strong enough for them to just cancel the Parking charge (I
seriously doubt this is the case, but remain hopefull!) or - if
there is now some glitch in the system preventing me from
appealing correctly - or - a plot of some sort to make it as
difficult as possible to actively and fully appeal, per their
made up T's & C's.
I shall report back after follow up if there is any news.
#Post#: 97514--------------------------------------------------
Re: Padstow Parking Charge - Paid at meter, No receipt given,
screen shot of debit, money not taken
DIR By: RT
Date: November 10, 2025, 1:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Just a quick update - there is no Update. I've had zero
communication back from Alliance Parking, and I am still met
with the same message when entering details to challenge via
their appeals website.
I have also e-mailed the commisioners office directly, laying
out the scenario and requesting details of how to make good the
situation, along with a request that they cancel any further
action from Alliance given the situation. I have had zero
communication back from them as well. . . .
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 3
DIR Next Page