Tourist vows to ‘never return’ to Padstow after £170 car park fine
A tourist has vowed to never return to Padstow in Cornwall after being issued with a £170 parking ticket.
Dave Beavan, from Bath, visited the popular Cornish town with his family in August.
They stopped off at Daymer Bar, where he parked in a nearby car park and tried to pay using a mobile app.
But with limited signal, he gave up and joined a queue of people waiting at the ticket machine.
He paid for three hours and claims he and his family returned to their vehicle within the allotted time.
But four months later, he has since received two Penalty Charge Notices in the post - which state he overstayed by 22 minutes.
Mr Beavan believes that is how long he waited in a queue at the ticket machine after trying to pay on his phone.
“It states we overstayed our parking by 22 minutes and that the fine is £170 per vehicle, or £60 if we pay immediately,” he explained.
“We decided to challenge these fines for two reasons.
"Firstly, when you pay for your parking and obtain a ticket, the entry and exit times are auto generated by the machine at the time.
“You cannot change it to put in an earlier time of entry. Secondly, the penalty notice shows two photographs from an ANPR (Automatic number Plate Reader) camera at the entrance and exit to the car park.
"Therefore, the timings used to issue these huge fines are taken from the parking company’s ANPR cameras that are not linked in anyway to the payment machine.
“We spent 20 minutes trying to pay on the app, or queuing at the machine and the whole time we were unknowingly being timed for an unknown parking fine."
The penalty charge notices state Mr Beavan has until December 17 to pay £100 - or the full £170 after that.
He lodged appeal but claimed it was rejected.
He has since vowed never to return to Daymer Bay or use an Alliance Parking-owned car park.
‘Inconceivable and false’
In response, Alliance Parking UK suggested Mr Beaver had “loitered” before paying at the machine.
“The motorist submitted an appeal regarding this parking charge, and our review confirmed that other vehicles that entered around the same time as the complainant paid for their stay within 10 minutes of arrival,” the company said.
“As such, we can only conclude the complainant’s allegation they were queuing at payment terminals for 20 minutes plus is inconceivable and false.
“It is more probable than not that the complainant loitered at their vehicle for a period (perhaps chatting to the occupants of the other car that they were travelling with), or even unpacked their vehicle prior to attempting to make payment; and failed to ensure that they paid for the duration of their occupancy in full.”