DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 62538--------------------------------------------------
Smart Parking PCN - Parked in excess of the permitted free time
(ANPR) - Tottenham Hale Retail Park
DIR By: unfortunatemagpie
Date: March 14, 2025, 11:46 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I only just found out about this forum just now while doing a
Google search and reading some Reddit posts about appealing a
parking charge - y'all are legends! I personally view that some
of the PCNs given are just predatory, especially when the cost
of living has been rising as of late...
Anyways, my story. I'm the registered keeper of the car and just
received a notice of a PCN today 14 March. The driver was in the
retail park and having discussions with staff at a local
Halfords about repairs to a car and allegedly had the car parked
18 minutes in excess of the permitted free parking time of 3
hours in the private car park. I don't suppose Smart Parking, or
any of these companies, would waive off a PCN based on
compassionate grounds. However interestingly, I read that in
paragraph 9(5) that the notice to the keeper must be sent within
14 days from the day after the period of parking has ended - the
last day of that period should be 12 March. But in paragraph
9(6) it does say that a letter is presumed to be delivered two
working days after it is posted. If we assume it's from the date
of issue, 10 March, that would mean it's presumed to be
delivered on 12 March, luckily just on the last day of the
period for them. I received the letter today, but unfortunately
there's no post markings on the envelope to show the date it's
been delivered, unless Royal Mail helps out somehow. Or is there
another way I can appeal this with the experts here?
Sorry, Imgur didn't work for me, but the pictures of the PCN are
here:
HTML https://postimg.cc/gallery/7Hgjkgd
#Post#: 62580--------------------------------------------------
Re: Smart Parking PCN - Parked in excess of the permitted free
time (ANPR) - Tottenham Hale Retail Park
DIR By: G6PRK
Date: March 14, 2025, 3:09 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
You're absolutely right, the vast majority, if not all PCNs are
predatory. If you are prepared to fight these people all the
way, and follow the advice on this forum, it is highly unlikely
you will ever pay a penny.
The first thing you should do is complain to the relevant
retailer(s) and ask them to get the charge cancelled if you
haven't already done so. Stress (politely) that you don't expect
to be harassed by unregulated and predatory parking companies as
a result of being a customer in their establishments.
Next, appeal as instructed in the NtK. You could wait til nearer
the deadline if complaining to retailer(s).
Make sure that the unknown drivers identity is not revealed.
There is no legal obligation on the known keeper (the recipient
of the Notice to Keeper (NtK)) to reveal the identity of the
unknown driver and no inference or assumptions can be made.
The NtK is not compliant with all the requirements of PoFA which
means that if the unknown driver is not identified, they cannot
transfer liability for the charge from the unknown driver to the
known keeper.
You're absolutely right to question the date of receipt - and
this will be one of your points of appeal at POPLA when it
likely progresses to that stage. The private parking sector
single Code of Practice requires operators to provide proof of
postage in situations such as this.
Use the following as your appeal (with regards to b789). No need
to embellish or remove anything from it:
--- Quote ---
> PCN No: [PCN number]
> Vehicle Registration Mark [VRM]
>
> I am the keeper of the vehicle and I dispute your 'parking
charge'. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I
will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your
client landowner.
>
> As your Notice to Keeper (NtK) does not fully comply with ALL
the requirements of PoFA 2012, you are unable to hold the keeper
of the vehicle liable for the charge. Partial or even
substantial compliance is not sufficient. There will be no
admission as to who was driving and no inference or assumptions
can be drawn. Smart Parking has relied on contract law
allegations of breach against the driver only.
>
> The registered keeper cannot be presumed or inferred to have
been the driver, nor pursued under some twisted interpretation
of the law of agency. Your NtK can only hold the driver liable.
Smart have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a
complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 62600--------------------------------------------------
Re: Smart Parking PCN - Parked in excess of the permitted free
time (ANPR) - Tottenham Hale Retail Park
DIR By: b789
Date: March 14, 2025, 4:48 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
On rejection of the appeal, you can require (not so) Smart
Parking to provide proof of posting to show the date the NtK
entered the postal system. The PPSCoP section 8.1.2(e) Note 2
requires that operators must retain a record of the date of
posting of a notice, not simply of that notice having been
generated (e.g. the date that any third-party Mail Consolidator
actually put it in the postal system.)
They won't be able to but may try to fob the assessor off with a
copy of a hybrid mail receipt from their consolidator which does
not evidence the date it was entered into the postal system but
will likely evidence that their consolidator does not use first
class mail which is supposed to guarantee delivery in 1-2 days,
hence the two working day deadline for delivery, but they will
show 2-3 day delivery which means that, even of the receipt was
proof of the letter entering the postal system, it cannot be
deemed to have been delivered after two working days but three
working days.
It is also very unlikely Smart can provide evidence that they
have a valid contract flowing from the landowner that authorises
them to issue PCNs t the location. All good stuff for the POPLA
appeal.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1