Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Private parking tickets => Topic started by: Camperman on March 27, 2026, 11:46:25 am
-
You are overthinking this. They can only pursue the driver, who is unknown to them, as this is not relevant land.
This fact alone is fatal to their PCN.
The more information you share with them, the more they can potentially find ways to identify a driver.
So your best advice here is to stick to the known method to get this PCN cancelled.
-
Thanks. I now understand that I need to respond as the registered keeper but will not reveal the identity of the driver as there is no legal requirement for me to do so.
What's bugging me is that I'm certain they've made a mistake. The driver is familiar with the airport and has used the drop off many times. They didn't enter it.
I firmly believe it's a system discrepancy caused by the inability for my number plate to be read by some of their cameras. The person who the driver spoke to at the barrier told the driver as much. The barrier needed to be lifted manually. I suspect this has something to do with the vehicle having been wrongly identified as having entered the drop off zone. The driver had absolutely no reason to enter the drop off zone having pre booked parking in the mid stay car park.
The photographs don't really prove anything, it's just a terrible quality, small image of the vehicle. Who's to say where that was taken? It looks as far as I can tell as though it's a capture possibly taken at the ticket barrier entrance to the mid stay for which parking had been pre booked and paid for.
-
Two things:
- https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/
- https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/apcoa-manchester-airport-pcn/msg74812/#msg74812
Essentially if you search the forum you will find similar cases and successful appeals.
APCOA doesn’t “do” court.
-
I've received a parking charge pertaining to the alleged to contravention of: use of pick up / drop of zone without making a valid payment at Manchester airport lower drop off four court T1.
On the day in question, the vehicle which was alleged to have being involved in the contravention was legitimately parked at the mid stay multi-story car park where it remained for a number of days.
I can only assume that the alleged offence took place at some point during the vehicle entering the car park.
The Pearson driving is familiar with aforementioned drop off zone and does not believe they entered it. The vehicle did not stop as far as I am aware at any point and nobody left the vehicle at any point.
There are a couple of points which may be of interest. Firstly, the person driving was unable to locate the multi-storey car park entrance on their first approach and drove past and back out onto the main road and back around the roundabout following the signs as they did previously before successfully finding the entrance which they had initially driven past. They do not believe that they entered the drop-off zone by doing so.
Secondly, when the person driving got to the entrance barrier at the car park entrance, the barrier did not lift and the person driving had to push the help button and speak to an operative who lifted the barrier remotely, explaining that the camera system had difficulty reading the vehicles number plates.
What I am wondering is if the ANPR system incorrectly believes that the vehicle entered the drop of zone because some of its cameras were not able to fully track it's legitimate route journey back out onto the road system and back in to the parking entrance area due to the same issue which caused the barrier not to lift at the car park entrance.
I would be really grateful for any help regarding this matter.