URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 76489--------------------------------------------------
       Overstay Charge - Furzton Lake  - Smart Parking Ltd
   DIR By: ian505050
       Date: June 14, 2025, 1:57 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       So I received the attached Parking Charge of £50 for overstaying
       in a 2-hour limit at Furzton Lake in Milton Keynes from Smart
       Parking Ltd
       The letter states arrival time 10:21 and Departure time 12:34 so
       a stay of 2 hours 13 mins which I guess has triggered the
       ticket.
       However, after entering the carpark 10:21 I could not find a
       space so I left within a minute.
       At 10:38 after doing a lap of the lake, trying to decide where
       to park I actually parked in the carpark until 12:34 after
       finding space ( parking for 1 hour and 56 minutes). I set a
       timer on my phone, making sure not to stay the 2-hour limit.
       13 days after the incident, I received a letter in the post with
       a fine.
       What should my course of action be? I have until the 25th of
       June to decide.
       Is the system Smart Parking Ltd use not smart enough to
       understand this scenario? Car park was full, so I left and tried
       again shortly etc...
       I am not really interested in paying the fine even though it's
       not a huge amount as a point of principle..... I didn't read the
       T&Cs in the car park or take a photo, so don't know what they
       say but............. I didn't stay 2 hours.
       My potential evidence would be my google timeline, which tracks
       my phone's location and matches the above, but don't suspect
       this is good enough evidence?
       Any suggestions or guidance is very much appreciated.
       [attachment deleted by admin]
       #Post#: 76517--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Overstay Charge - Furzton Lake  - Smart Parking Ltd
   DIR By: b789
       Date: June 14, 2025, 7:02 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       It is a scam but it is difficult to persuade them that time on
       site is not actually parked. But fear not. You have a "golden
       ticket". Whilst it may be a drawn out process since (not so)
       Smart Parking left the BPA and joined the IPC, this would never
       stand up in court.
       The reason you have a "golden ticket" is because, as long as the
       unknown driver is not identified, they cannot transfer liability
       to the known Keeper. They have failed to "give" the Notice
       within the "relevant" period to be able to rely on the
       provisions of PoFA 2012.
       PoFA paragraph 9(4) requires the Notice to be "given"
       (delivered) within 14 days of the alleged contravention. A
       Notice is deemed "given" two working days after it is issued.
       Your Notice to Keeper (NtK) was issued on Thursday 12th June and
       therefore deemed "given" on Monday 16th June. Now do the
       maths... The date of the alleged contravention was Saturday 31st
       May. As it is more than 14 days after the alleged contravention,
       the Notice has not been given within the relevant period and so
       there can be no Keeper liability.
       Of course, the Keeper is under no legal obligation to identify
       the driver so all references to the driver must be in the third
       person. No "I did this or that, only "the driver did this or
       that". Don't tell 'em your name Pike!!!
       Any initial appeal will be rejected but you can then try the
       IAS, which is unfit for purpose but we give it a go anyway. The
       normal modus operandi of (not so) Smart Parking is to pursue the
       Keeper all the way to litigation and a court claim, in the hope
       that you are low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree and will pay
       up out of ignorance and fear. However, once claim is submitted,
       as long as it is defended, it will eventually either be struck
       out or discontinued.
       So, if you follow the advice, you wonn't be paying this scammer
       a penny. For now, simply appeal, only as the Keeper, with the
       following:
       --- Quote ---
       > 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 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 IAS, so you are urged to save us both a
       complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
       --- End Quote ---
       Also, as they have breached the PPSCoP section 8.1.1(d), you
       should report (not so) Smart to the DVLA as they are using your
       data unlawfully. Here’s how to make a DVLA complaint:
       [indent]• Go to:
  HTML https://contact.dvla.gov.uk/complaints
       • Select: “Making a complaint or compliment about the Vehicles
       service you have received”
       • Enter your personal details, contact details, and vehicle
       details
       • Use the text box to summarise your complaint or insert a
       covering note
       • You will then be able to upload a file (up to 19.5 MB) — this
       can be your full complaint or supporting evidence
       That’s it.[/indent]
       The DVLA is required to record, investigate and respond to every
       complaint about a private parking company. If everyone who
       encounters a breach took the time to submit a complaint, we
       might finally see the DVLA take meaningful action—whether that
       means curtailing or removing KADOE access altogether.
       For the text part of the complaint the webform could use the
       following:
       --- Quote ---
       > I am submitting a formal complaint against Smart Parking Ltd,
       an IPC AOS member with DVLA KADOE access, for breaching the
       BPA/IPC Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP) after
       obtaining my personal data.
       >
       > Smart Parking posted a Notice to Keeper (NtK) dated Thursday
       12 June for an alleged contravention on Saturday 31 May. Because
       (a) more than 14 days elapsed between the day after the event
       and the date the NtK could be “given” (deemed delivery is the
       second working day after posting), and (b) Smart Parking
       nonetheless asserts keeper liability under PoFA 2012 Schedule 4,
       the operator is misusing my data in breach of the PPSCoP and the
       KADOE contract.
       >
       > The DVLA, as data controller, is obliged under UK GDPR and the
       Data Protection Act 2018 to investigate and take enforcement
       action when data is misused. I have attached a supporting
       statement that sets out the breach in detail and request a full
       investigation.
       >
       > Please acknowledge receipt and confirm the reference number
       for this complaint.
       --- End Quote ---
       Then you could upload the following as a PDF file for the formal
       complaint itself:
       --- Quote ---
       > SUPPORTING STATEMENT
       >
       > Complaint to DVLA – Breach of KADOE Contract and PPSCoP
       >
       > Operator name: Smart Parking Ltd
       > Date of PCN (NtK) issue: Thursday 12 June 2025
       > Vehicle registration: [INSERT VRM]
       >
       > I am submitting this complaint because Smart Parking Ltd has
       misused my personal data obtained from the DVLA under the KADOE
       (Keeper at Date of Event) contract.
       >
       > Although Smart Parking may have had reasonable cause to
       request my data initially, its subsequent use of that data is
       unlawful. The operator has breached both the Protection of
       Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) and the Private Parking Single Code of
       Practice (PPSCoP).
       >
       > Timeline:
       >
       > [indent]• Alleged contravention date: Saturday 31 May 2025
       > • NtK issue date: Thursday 12 June 2025
       > • Earliest deemed date of service: Monday 16 June
       2025[/indent]
       >
       > Under PoFA Schedule 4 paragraph 9(5), the operator must
       deliver a Notice to Keeper within 14 days of the day after the
       date of the alleged contravention. In this case, the notice
       could not have been “given” (i.e. deemed delivered) until at
       least 16 days after the parking event — which is out of time for
       establishing keeper liability.
       >
       > Despite this, Smart Parking's NtK falsely asserts that the
       registered keeper is liable under PoFA. This is a direct breach
       of Section 8.1.1(d) of the Private Parking Single Code of
       Practice, which states:
       >
       > [indent]“The parking operator must not serve a notice which in
       its design and/or language: state the keeper is liable under the
       Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 where they cannot be held
       liable.”[/indent]
       >
       > The NtK is therefore misleading and represents an unlawful use
       of DVLA-supplied data.
       >
       > Summary of Breaches:
       >
       > [indent]• Breach of PoFA – NtK issued too late for keeper
       liability
       > • Breach of PPSCoP 8.1.1(d) – NtK falsely states keeper
       liability applies
       > • Misuse of personal data – unlawful post-access processing
       under UK GDPR
       > • Breach of KADOE contract – DVLA data used in a way not
       permitted by the conditions of access[/indent]
       >
       > These are not minor or technical errors; they show a systemic
       disregard for lawful data use and statutory obligations.
       >
       > Action requested:
       >
       > The DVLA remains the data controller for keeper data released
       under KADOE and has a duty to act where it is misused. I
       therefore request:
       >
       > [indent]• A formal investigation into Smart Parking Ltd’s
       misuse of DVLA data
       > • Confirmation of whether a breach of the KADOE contract has
       occurred
       > • Enforcement action including suspension or removal of KADOE
       access if appropriate[/indent]
       >
       > Please confirm receipt of this complaint and provide a
       reference number. I am happy to provide further information if
       needed.
       >
       > Name: [INSERT NAME]
       > Date: [INSERT DATE]
       --- End Quote ---
       #Post#: 76601--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Overstay Charge - Furzton Lake  - Smart Parking Ltd
   DIR By: ian505050
       Date: June 15, 2025, 3:31 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Many thanks for the comprehensive response. I will  review
       documents you refer to  this week and the paragraphs where Smart
       Park Ltd have failed to abide.
       If I appeal via Smart Park Ltd which will inevitably be rejected
       can I start an appeal via POPLA who will agree with the points
       you have stated and request Smart Park Ltd cancel the charge
       requested?
       I have only ever had 1 previous ticket against myself as a
       registered keeper 10 years ago where I used POPLA who got the
       ticket cancelled from memory for being 9 minutes in a car park.
       #Post#: 76602--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Overstay Charge - Furzton Lake  - Smart Parking Ltd
   DIR By: ixxy
       Date: June 15, 2025, 3:46 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       You won't be able to appeal to POPLA, not so SMART parking have
       defected to the dark side and become IPC members so the
       secondary appeal will be to the IAS who unfortunately have a
       reputation for nearly always siding with the parking operator.
       You will probably lose the appeal to the IAS bit don't worry, it
       won't get to court as they can't win as long as you don't reveal
       who was driving. I wouldn't suggest appealing to SMART on the
       grounds of the medical incident (even though it is valid) as it
       would probably identify the driver. Just appeal on the grounds
       they can't hold you, as keeper of the vehicle, liable as they
       issued the PCN too late. You will probably get lots of debt
       collectors letters, they can be ignored unless you get a proper
       letter of claim.
       #Post#: 79541--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Overstay Charge - Furzton Lake  - Smart Parking Ltd
   DIR By: ian505050
       Date: July 4, 2025, 6:46 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       The DVLA have now responded to my complaint about Smart Parking
       Ltd issuing their ticket after the official  14 days period .
       It looks like the DVLA has interpreted what 14 days means
       differently.
       Any suggestions on what my response needs to be to the DVLA?
       I assume DVLAs response to me has also been communicated to
       Smart Park Ltd?
       Attached is the DVLAs response
       Kind Regards
       [attachment deleted by admin]
       #Post#: 79544--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Overstay Charge - Furzton Lake  - Smart Parking Ltd
   DIR By: b789
       Date: July 4, 2025, 7:05 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Email back to kadoescalation@dvla.gov.uk and CC yourself with
       the following:
       --- Quote ---
       > To: kadoescalation@dvla.gov.uk
       >
       > Subject: Step 2 Escalation – Mishandling of Step 1 Complaint
       Ref. [INSERT REFERENCE NO.] (Smart Parking PoFA Breach)
       >
       > Dear DVLA Escalations Team,
       >
       > I am writing to escalate my complaint to Step 2 of the DVLA’s
       complaint process, in relation to your reference [INSERT
       REFERENCE NO.], following the wholly inaccurate and inadequate
       response issued on 4 July 2025 by A. Larsen.
       >
       > My original complaint concerned Smart Parking Ltd’s misuse of
       DVLA keeper data, specifically the unlawful assertion of keeper
       liability under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act
       2012 (PoFA), when the statutory conditions were clearly not met.
       I now also raise concerns about the incompetent handling of this
       complaint at Step 1 by your Data Assurance Team.
       >
       > Summary of Material Facts:
       >
       > [indent]• Contravention date: Saturday 31 May 2025
       > • NtK issue date: Thursday 12 June 2025
       > • Deemed “given” date: Monday 16 June 2025 (second working day
       after posting, as per PoFA Sch 4 para 9(6))[/indent]
       >
       > This means the Notice to Keeper was given 16 days after the
       day following the alleged contravention. PoFA paragraph 9(5) is
       unequivocal:
       >
       > [indent]“The notice must be given by—
       > (a) delivering it to that address; or
       > (b) sending it by post to that address,
       > so that it is delivered within the relevant period.”[/indent]
       >
       > The relevant period, as defined in PoFA 9(5), is 14 days
       beginning with the day after the parking event (i.e. from 1 June
       2025). Therefore, the final day for the NtK to be “given” was
       Saturday 14 June 2025.
       >
       > Because the NtK was issued on Thursday 12 June and deemed
       delivered no earlier than Monday 16 June, it was not “given”
       within the relevant period. Therefore, keeper liability cannot
       arise, and Smart Parking’s assertion to the contrary constitutes
       a breach of the Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP)
       section 8.1.1(d), which prohibits operators from stating that
       the keeper is liable when they cannot be.
       >
       > A. Larsen's Response – Factually and Legally Flawed:
       >
       > Mr/Ms Larsen claims:
       >
       > [indent]“To meet the requirements of PoFA, [the NtK] must be
       sent by day 12... to ensure that it arrives by day 14.”[/indent]
       >
       > This is factually wrong. PoFA requires the NtK to be “given”
       within 14 days, not merely posted. The law expressly states that
       delivery is what matters. Even if an NtK is posted on day 12, it
       is not “given” until the second working day later, as per PoFA
       paragraph 9(6). No exception is made for weekends.
       >
       > The DVLA is the data controller and cannot be seen to condone
       or excuse this sort of misuse, especially based on a
       misunderstanding of the very legislation that governs access to
       its data.
       >
       > I therefore expect:
       >
       > [indent]• A full review and correction of the Step 1 response
       > • A formal finding that Smart Parking breached the KADOE
       contract and PPSCoP
       > • Confirmation that enforcement action is being considered or
       taken against Smart Parking
       > • Internal remedial action regarding Mr/Ms Larsen’s
       mishandling of this matter, given the seriousness of the
       misinterpretation of Schedule 4 of PoFA[/indent]
       >
       > I also request that DVLA include this complaint in its
       performance monitoring and audit records for misuse of data by
       private parking operators.
       >
       > Please acknowledge receipt and confirm the escalation
       reference number for this Step 2 complaint. I am happy to
       provide further supporting material if needed.
       >
       > Yours faithfully,
       >
       > [YOUR FULL NAME]
       > [YOUR POSTCODE]
       > [DATE]
       --- End Quote ---
       #Post#: 80200--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Overstay Charge - Furzton Lake  - Smart Parking Ltd
   DIR By: ian505050
       Date: July 9, 2025, 3:31 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi b789,
       I appreciate the almost immediate response. I have sent step 2
       of the complaint to the DVLA. I cant thank you enough for your
       help to resolve this issue created by Smart Parking and the
       DVLA.
       #Post#: 80201--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Overstay Charge - Furzton Lake  - Smart Parking Ltd
   DIR By: ian505050
       Date: July 9, 2025, 3:40 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       kadoescalation@dvla.gov.uk
       This email does not seem to be an email used anymore as I got an
       automated response saying undeliverable. However, I have sent
       the complaint via the online DVLA form, where it let me add the
       complaint as a PDF attachment.
       #Post#: 80204--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Overstay Charge - Furzton Lake  - Smart Parking Ltd
   DIR By: DWMB2
       Date: July 9, 2025, 3:53 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I've not used that email before (I just use their online
       function) but there would appear to be an "e" missing, would it
       not be kadoeescalation@...?
       #Post#: 80425--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Overstay Charge - Furzton Lake  - Smart Parking Ltd
   DIR By: ian505050
       Date: July 10, 2025, 7:52 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Cheers. I have tried sending to the email with an extra 'e'
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 2
   DIR Next Page