A parking firm has responded following criticism from a dad who was given a £100 parking fine when shopping at Marks and Spencer.

Tim Coates parked up to shop at the Marks and Spencer at the Peel Centre in Stockport on June 22 this year and 'didn't think anything of it'. However he later found out he had fallen foul of Ocean Parking's strict rules.

These state that cars must be completely between the white lines of the parking bay and a photo seen by the LDRS that was taken when the fine was issued shows Mr Coates' tyre on the white line.

As a result, Mr Coates was slapped with a £100 fine which the dad later appealed. He said: "Due to the car parked next to me, I couldn't park any closer or I couldn't get the pram out.

"There's literally one tyre on the white line. They said I was obstructing someone from parking in the bay next to me. I tried to appeal it, [asking for] a common sense policy if you have got a child in the car. I needed the space."

This appeal was later rejected but Mr Coates said he never received notification of this until a debt collector's letter came through. He claims this meant he missed the window of opportunity to either pay the fine before it increased to £170 or appeal it further.

In a response to the criticism, a spokesperson for Ocean Parking said: "We can confirm that the PCN was issued at the Peel Centre, Stockport, on 22 June 2026 for the vehicle not being parked wholly within a marked bay.

"The motorist appealed on 1 July and our records show that the appeal outcome was emailed to them on 3 July. When they subsequently contacted us on 10 August stating they had not received the outcome, we provided a further copy on 11 August.

"The PCN was passed to debt recovery on 14 August after no further correspondence or payment was received. When the motorist contacted us again on 2 September regarding their opportunity to appeal to the IAS, we advised that, although the standard 28-day period had expired, they could submit a non-standard appeal.

"No further contact has been received and no appeal has been submitted to the IAS. We understand that receiving a parking charge can be frustrating, and we have sought to address the motorist's concerns by providing copies of the relevant correspondence and explaining the options available to them."

In response to a complaint to International Parking Community (IPC), a DVLA-accredited trade association, they said the evidence suggested Mr Coates had been informed by email on July 3 his appeal had been rejected and Ocean Parking said they 'did not receive any notification that the email had failed to send or was undeliverable'.

The IPC said they had not seen any evidence suggesting Ocean Parking failed to issue the notice or provide information. They said there had been no breaches of any code of practice in the handling of the fine.

However Mr Coates wants to raise awareness, fearing others may be caught out.

He told the LDRS: "I could understand if I was parked over the white line and parked like a buffoon but it's literally millimetres", adding: "It's caused me anxiety.

"I don't mind saying that. I am quite mentally tough but this has caused me anguish. In a world at the moment since Covid where it seems you do not get good customer service anywhere, you are treated like you are processed.

"There is no human element to this. There's no humanity or compassion."

He added: "I parked in good faith. For it to cost £170 to go into M&S is a bit unpleasant. I am really angry but I am sure there are others in Stockport like this."

Mr Coates has also raised the issue with his local MP Navendu Mishra, who told the LDRS : "I have raised, and will continue to raise, constituents' concerns with Ocean Parking, which manages the Peel Centre car park. In the past, I have met with representatives from Ocean Parking to discuss issues that residents have experienced, and those discussions resulted in changes being made.

"The Peel Centre is used by tens of thousands of people, and while concerns about parking enforcement are understandably frustrating for those affected, it is not appropriate for me to comment on individual cases."

Marks and Spencer declined to comment.

Categories: