They look like photos on foot to me, and the 33 seconds is the time it took to walk from front to back.
Bingo. It's not the time spent in the car park, just the time the photos were taken. If this were ever to get as far as court etc. that'd be another point to raise, as the times of the photos do not span a long enough period to specify a period of parking - 33 seconds is clearly less than any reasonable consideration period, and without any additional photos, they have provided no evidence that the driver stayed longer than any such period.
For now, I suggest sending the appeal drafted.