DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 101784--------------------------------------------------
Smart Parking Charge
DIR By: emb1234
Date: December 10, 2025, 3:00 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi all,
I’ve received a smart parking letter for not paying the correct
funds for parking at Telford shopping centre. However, we
parked, paid in coins at the machine when left and when I drove
to the barrier it raised and didn’t ask for my ticket. Now they
want £60 in the next 3 days or £100 after this. We have no proof
as it was paid in coins.
Is there anything I can do about this as I feel it’s really
unfair as we did pay?
I’m not from that area so the barrier raising without the ticket
being entered I didn’t realise was not the norm (maybe it is)
Any help would be hugely appreciated, this really isn’t
something I can afford :(
#Post#: 101785--------------------------------------------------
Re: Smart Parking Charge
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: December 10, 2025, 3:04 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You'll need to post up the PCN redacting personal info only.
Smart are easily defeated.
#Post#: 101786--------------------------------------------------
Re: Smart Parking Charge
DIR By: emb1234
Date: December 10, 2025, 3:10 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I have the pictures but can’t work out how to attach them :(
#Post#: 101787--------------------------------------------------
Re: Smart Parking Charge
DIR By: Mustek
Date: December 10, 2025, 3:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Instructions on posting images can be found in this thread:
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/announcements/posting-images/
#Post#: 101789--------------------------------------------------
Re: Smart Parking Charge
DIR By: emb1234
Date: December 10, 2025, 3:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hey,
The link to my images are here:
HTML https://we.tl/t-qWcyToR17K
Thank you!
HTML https://we.tl/t-qWcyToR17K
HTML https://we.tl/t-qWcyToR17K
#Post#: 101791--------------------------------------------------
Re: Smart Parking Charge
DIR By: jfollows
Date: December 10, 2025, 3:27 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I get a page asking me to sign up and to agree to some terms and
conditions, I’m not going to do either.
#Post#: 101793--------------------------------------------------
Re: Smart Parking Charge
DIR By: emb1234
Date: December 10, 2025, 3:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
What about this one?
HTML https://ibb.co/BKCw0c8d
HTML https://ibb.co/Qv2M5KrZ
HTML https://ibb.co/BKCw0c8d
HTML https://ibb.co/Qv2M5KrZ
HTML https://ibb.co/BKCw0c8d<br
/>
HTML https://ibb.co/Qv2M5KrZ
HTML https://ibb.co/BKCw0c8d
HTML https://ibb.co/Qv2M5KrZ
#Post#: 101794--------------------------------------------------
Re: Smart Parking Charge
DIR By: jfollows
Date: December 10, 2025, 3:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
They seem fine, yes.
#Post#: 101796--------------------------------------------------
Re: Smart Parking Charge
DIR By: emb1234
Date: December 10, 2025, 3:50 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi,
Just for more context, I realised it was the second car park I
parked in that day (I parked in 2 at Telford) this one didn’t
have barriers. We again, pair in coins so no proof and it looks
like (we didn’t realise) you can only pay for an hour and each
hour you have to top it up, and I went slightly over this (we
were eating in a restaurant). We thought we had paid for the
day, we didn’t realise it was capped, so I guess I am at fault.
#Post#: 101900--------------------------------------------------
Re: Smart Parking Charge
DIR By: b789
Date: December 10, 2025, 12:22 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Oh dear... the low-hanging fruit are about to be plucked from
the gullible tree! Why on earth do you imagine that you are at
fault? This is exactly the kind of thinking that these scamming
firms make all their money on.
Even though (not so) Smart’s Notice to Keeper (NtK) name-checks
PoFA and paragraphs 9(2)(b) and 9(2)(f), it still fails the
basic requirement in 9(2)(a) to specify a “period of parking”.
All they have shown is time on site from ANPR entry and exit
images. ANPR records movement across a boundary, not parking,
and does not evidence any actual stationary “period of parking”.
Because PoFA is a strict statutory regime, partial or
substantial compliance is not enough; Smart must meet every
mandatory sub-paragraph if they wish to transfer liability from
the unknown driver to known Keeper. Their NtK specifically
states that it is a "Parking Charge", not a "Time on site
charge".
The consequence is that there is no Keeper liability at all
under PoFA. Only the unknown driver could ever be liable. As
long as the Keeper does not identify the driver, (not so) Smart
Parking can pursue their allegation only against the driver and
cannot rely on PoFA to hold the keeper liable. As there is no
legal obligation for the Keeper to identify the driver, how do
you think they could know the drivers identity unless you blab
it to them, inadvertently or otherwise.
On that basis it is entirely appropriate to appeal as the Keeper
only, denying liability and pointing out the PoFA failure. For
an IPC member like (not so) Smart, the second stage would be the
kangaroo court that is the IAS, but the core point remains that
this is a non-PoFA notice because it specifically Staes that
they can only rely on PoFA subject to their compliance, so any
attempt to hold the Keeper liable is misconceived.
A suitable initial appeal to (not so) Smart Parking as Keeper
would be:
--- 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.
>
> Your Notice to Keeper does not fully comply with all the
requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act
2012. In particular, it fails to specify any “period of parking”
as required by paragraph 9(2)(a); ANPR entry and exit times are
not evidence of a period of parking. Partial or even substantial
compliance is not sufficient. You are therefore unable to hold
the Keeper of the vehicle liable for this charge.
>
> There will be no admission as to who was driving and no
inference or assumptions can be drawn. Smart Parking Ltd 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 any supposed law of
agency. Your Notice to Keeper can only ever hold the driver
liable and you do not know who that was.
>
> If you refuse this appeal, you are invited to issue a
rejection letter and an IAS code, but you have no realistic
prospect of success given the above, so you are urged to cancel
the PCN now and avoid a complete waste of everyone’s time.
--- End Quote ---
Come back when they reject that appeal (all initial appeals are
rejected, irrespective of the content) and we can give you a
suitable IAS appeal that will get the IAS adjudicator aroused
enough to wet themselves into possibly actually considering the
legal points raised, but don't hold out for success from this
kangaroo court.
I can assure you with greater than 99.9% confidence that if you
follow the advice you receive here, you will not be paying a
penny to (not so) Smart, even though it is likely to go all the
way to a county court claim, which we will assist in defending
and it WILL either be struck out or discontinued before any
hearing ever takes place.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1