This is the exact wording of my appeal submitted 2 days ago, (I will remove any reference number and personal details):
Subject: Appeal against Parking Charge Notice 123
Dear ES Parking Enforcement,
I am writing to formally appeal Parking Charge Notice 123, issued in relation to the allegation:
“Parked in a Parent and Child bay without a child.”
I strongly dispute this allegation and request that the Parking Charge Notice is cancelled.
The vehicle was being used to collect our child
We did not use a Parent and Child bay simply for convenience while travelling without a child.
We attended The Peel Centre specifically to collect our child, who was at the play area located beneath/near the cinema. Our child was therefore at the site and was subsequently collected and transported from the site in this vehicle.
The vehicle is regularly used to transport our children and has two child car seats fitted. Photographs can be supplied showing these seats if required.
The allegation that we had parked in a Parent and Child bay “without a child” therefore does not properly reflect what actually happened. We were parents attending the site for the purpose of collecting our child.
Your photographs do not establish the alleged contravention
I have reviewed all of the photographic evidence available through your online portal.
The evidence appears to consist only of photographs taken at approximately 20:47 showing us leaving the vehicle, followed by photographs of the vehicle at approximately 20:48.
These photographs merely show a very brief snapshot of events. They do not demonstrate that we did not have a child to collect, nor do they show the complete circumstances surrounding our visit.
Most importantly, they do not show what happened when we subsequently returned to the vehicle with our child.
It appears that the conclusion that there was “no child” was reached simply because a child was not physically with us during the short period in which the photographs were taken.
That assumption was incorrect.
We were collecting our child from a facility at the site.
Given that an attendant appears to have been physically present and observed us leaving the vehicle, it is also disappointing that no attempt was made to ask us whether we had a child with us or why we were using the Parent and Child bay.
A simple question at the time would have allowed us to explain immediately that we were there to collect our child and would have avoided this entire unnecessary process.
Instead, photographs were taken over a very short period and an assumption appears to have been made without establishing the complete circumstances.
Please identify the exact parking term allegedly breached
If ES Parking Enforcement maintains that a parent who is genuinely attending the site to collect their child is prohibited from using a Parent and Child bay, please provide the exact contractual term displayed at this location on 4 September 2026 which establishes that restriction.
In particular, please identify where the signage states that a child must be physically accompanying the parent when the parent exits the vehicle, rather than the bay being used by a parent for the purpose of transporting/collecting a child.
Please also provide clear photographs of the signage applicable to the particular bay and the wording that you contend formed the parking contract.
Notice to Keeper
I also note that the Notice to Keeper identifies an “Incident Time” of 20:48, but I cannot identify a specified period of parking on the notice.
If ES Parking Enforcement intends to rely upon Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 to establish keeper liability, please identify where the Notice to Keeper specifies the “period of parking” required by Schedule 4, rather than simply providing a single incident time.
Request for cancellation
In summary:
• Our child was at the site and we attended specifically to collect them.
• The child subsequently travelled from the site in this vehicle.
• The vehicle has two fitted child car seats and is routinely used for transporting our children.
• The photographic evidence merely captures us leaving the vehicle and the vehicle itself over a very short period.
• The photographs do not establish that no child was being collected or subsequently transported.
• The attendant could easily have asked us about the circumstances but did not do so.
• If ES contends that collecting a child does not qualify for use of the bay, I request the precise contractual wording displayed at the location establishing that restriction.
In light of the actual circumstances and the limited evidence relied upon, I respectfully request that Parking Charge Notice ESMN1009721 is cancelled.
If you decline this appeal, please provide a detailed response addressing each of the points above and provide the information necessary for the matter to be referred to the Independent Appeals Service.
Please also preserve all photographs, attendant notes, observation records and any other evidence relating to this Parking Charge Notice while the matter remains disputed.
Yours faithfully,