URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 113317--------------------------------------------------
       Smart Parking NTK appeal rejected – no POFA keeper liability,
       should I fight it?
   DIR By: not_my_name
       Date: March 15, 2026, 9:05 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi everyone,
       I’m hoping to get some advice from people who have dealt with
       private parking charges before or who know a bit about the legal
       side of this. I'm based in England where it all happened.
       I received a Notice to Keeper from Smart Parking Ltd after an
       alleged overstay in a retail car park. According to them, the
       vehicle overstayed the maximum free parking time. The alleged
       contravention happened on 31 January 2026. The Notice to Keeper
       was issued on 16 February and I actually received it on 20
       February.
       From what I’ve read, if a parking company wants to rely on
       keeper liability under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms
       Act 2012, the Notice to Keeper is supposed to be delivered
       within 14 days of the alleged contravention. In this case it
       looks like it was issued 16 days after the event and received
       even later.
       I appealed as the registered keeper and didn’t say who the
       driver was. In the appeal I asked them to explain the allegation
       properly and provide evidence. They’ve now rejected the appeal
       and say the charge was issued correctly because the car park
       allows a maximum stay of 180 minutes and the vehicle was
       apparently there for 194 minutes.
       What confused me is that in their response they specifically say
       that Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (keeper
       liability) does not apply at this location. Because I didn’t
       identify the driver, they say they are entitled to reasonably
       infer that the keeper was the driver and they even cite Elliott
       v Loake as supporting case law.
       From what I understand, if they’re not relying on POFA then they
       can’t automatically hold the keeper liable and would have to
       prove who the driver actually was. I deliberately didn’t name
       the driver for that reason.
       They’ve now said my only options are to pay (they’ve extended
       the discount until the end of March) or appeal to the IAS, but
       they warn that if I go to the IAS and lose I’ll have to pay the
       full amount.
       I’m trying to decide whether it’s worth fighting this further or
       if I should just pay the discounted amount and move on. I’ve
       read mixed things about the IAS and also about whether Smart
       Parking actually take people to court.
       Has anyone here dealt with Smart Parking in a situation like
       this, or knows how strong their argument about “inferring the
       driver” actually is?
       Any advice would be really appreciated.
       EDIT 1:
       Correspondences in order:
       NTK Received:
  HTML https://postimg.cc/kRx3pVp2
       My Appeal:
  HTML https://postimg.cc/B8yrZcWG
       Their rejection:
  HTML https://postimg.cc/sGPqJkMC
       #Post#: 113319--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Smart Parking NTK appeal rejected – no POFA keeper
       liability, should I fight it?
   DIR By: jfollows
       Date: March 15, 2026, 9:14 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Please read
  HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/<br
       />and post as it requests, including the NtK.
       If the NtK was dated as you say, then the liability can not be
       transferred from the unknown driver to the registered keeper.
       Most appeals on this basis are rejected, because the parking
       companies only want your money and don’t care about the law, but
       they are not “entitled” to make the assumptions about the driver
       that they seem to claim. It’s their usual toxic nonsense in
       which they make untrue statements because it makes it more
       likely you believe them and pay them.
       #Post#: 113320--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Smart Parking NTK appeal rejected – no POFA keeper
       liability, should I fight it?
   DIR By: jfollows
       Date: March 15, 2026, 9:15 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Please read
  HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/<br
       />and post as it requests, including the NtK.
       If the NtK was dated as you say, then the liability can not be
       transferred from the unknown driver to the registered keeper.
       Most appeals on this basis are rejected, because the parking
       companies only want your money and don’t care about the law, but
       they are not “entitled” to make the assumptions about the driver
       that they seem to claim. It’s their usual toxic nonsense in
       which they make untrue statements because it makes it more
       likely you believe them and pay them.
       Apologies for posting twice.
       Appeal to the IAS, who will reject your appeal, ignore debt
       collectors, come back when you get a Letter of Claim. The
       process is to intimidate you into paying. In all likelihood, any
       defended claim will be discontinued and you will pay £0.
       #Post#: 113326--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Smart Parking NTK appeal rejected – no POFA keeper
       liability, should I fight it?
   DIR By: not_my_name
       Date: March 15, 2026, 10:50 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: jfollows link ---
       >
       > Please read
  HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/<br
       />and post as it requests, including the NtK.
       >
       > If the NtK was dated as you say, then the liability can not be
       transferred from the unknown driver to the registered keeper.
       >
       > Most appeals on this basis are rejected, because the parking
       companies only want your money and don’t care about the law, but
       they are not “entitled” to make the assumptions about the driver
       that they seem to claim. It’s their usual toxic nonsense in
       which they make untrue statements because it makes it more
       likely you believe them and pay them.
       >
       > Apologies for posting twice.
       >
       > Appeal to the IAS, who will reject your appeal, ignore debt
       collectors, come back when you get a Letter of Claim. The
       process is to intimidate you into paying. In all likelihood, any
       defended claim will be discontinued and you will pay £0.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Thank you! Will do. I've also edited with screenshots of the
       correspondence so far for context.
       #Post#: 113338--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Smart Parking NTK appeal rejected – no POFA keeper
       liability, should I fight it?
   DIR By: InterCity125
       Date: March 15, 2026, 4:57 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       The bit on Elliott v Loake is total BS.
       Elliott v Loake was a criminal case which turned on the facts of
       the case - the vehicle keeper was found with the only set of
       keys, only he was insured to drive the vehicle, he left forensic
       evidence at the crash site and he was shown to have lied to
       police in the investigation and again at Court!
       I mean, can you imagine a criminal case being judged on
       'reasonable assumption'???
       #Post#: 124526--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Smart Parking NTK appeal rejected – no POFA keeper
       liability, should I fight it?
   DIR By: A5599
       Date: July 13, 2026, 11:05 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi Not_My_Name,
       I have received the exact same wording on my NTK appeal
       rejection letter from Smart Parking with respect to challenging
       the PoFA keeper liability. Smart parking appear to use the same
       template for anyone challenging on these grounds.
       Can you share the outcome regarding your IAS appeal? I'm
       weighing up my options currently and would like some good news
       if you have any!
       #Post#: 124528--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Smart Parking NTK appeal rejected – no POFA keeper
       liability, should I fight it?
   DIR By: InterCity125
       Date: July 13, 2026, 11:08 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: A5599 link ---
       >
       > Hi Not_My_Name,
       >
       > I have received the exact same wording on my NTK appeal
       rejection letter from Smart Parking with respect to challenging
       the PoFA keeper liability. Smart parking appear to use the same
       template for anyone challenging on these grounds.
       >
       > Can you share the outcome regarding your IAS appeal? I'm
       weighing up my options currently and would like some good news
       if you have any!
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Could you please start your own thread and post up the PCN and
       the rejection letter?
       There's no problem in asking the OP how their case is going.
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 1