PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Wrong VRM entered into payment machine in error, Smart Parking
siouxie
post Thu, 11 Jan 2018 - 15:51
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 11 Jan 2018
Member No.: 95,906



Hi I'm new to the Forum but hope that someone may be able to offer some help in this situation.

My son's partner borrowed his car for a meeting in town as her own car was out of action. She parked it in a Smart Parking car park close to the meeting venue and in a hurry entered her own car VRM into the machine whilst paying for 4 hours parking.

A week after the event, my son as the registered keeper of his car, received a PCN from Smart Parking showing his car entering and leaving the car park. As she still had the car park ticket with all of the relevant details which coincided with the timing of his car entering and leaving the car park, he wrote (by signed for delivery) to tell Smart Parking of her error and provided them with the evidence which was a copy of the car park ticket, and asked them to consider cancelling the Parking Charge Notice.

Almost one month later he has received their reply which is to uphold the PCN as basically that by entering the incorrect VRM this resulted in no payment being assigned to the correct VRM for the amount of time it was on the site and that this breaches the advertised Terms and Conditions. They also stated that it is detailed on the car park signage that it is the responsibility of the motorist to enter the correct VRM when using the payment machine and ensure that payment is made for the full required stay duration.

His partner actually paid for 4 hours parking and was there for 2 hours 44 minutes so in essence the car park owners were not out of pocket and there was no intention to avoid payment but it was purely a genuine mistake.

Smart Parking have extended the discount period to pay £60 for a further week and have stated that he can appeal to POPLA and have provided him with a verification code but having read numerous threads, most suggest that POPLA are unlikely to go against Smart Parking's decision as the situation "breeches" their Terms and Conditions.

Interestingly though, I have noted a not dis-similar thread from 2015 on this website where a chap's wife borrowed a friends car and did exactly the same thing by inputting the wrong VRN and he wrote to Smart Parking who cancelled the PCN. Clearly my son wasn't so fortunate!

He could ignore it, as he wasn't the driver but having provided his partner's vehicle registration on the evidence, they will now be able to access her details and pursue her.

Can anyone suggest what his next move, should be? Any help or suggestions would be gratefully received.

Thank you!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 12)
Advertisement
post Thu, 11 Jan 2018 - 15:51
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
kommando
post Thu, 11 Jan 2018 - 16:21
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,763
Joined: 6 Oct 2012
Member No.: 57,558



QUOTE
he wrote (by signed for delivery)


Never do that again, always post first class at a counter and ask for proof of posting. They can refuse signed for post knowing it could be nasty and then you have no proof of delivery, first class is presumed to be delivered 2 days after posting

SMART do not comply with POFA 2012 to make the keeper liable for the drivers actions, as long as the driver has not been identified a correct POPLA appeal will succeed.

As his partners car was not in the car park at that point they cannot use it to get her details unless they breech the Kadoe agreement with the DVLA.

SMART do not currently do court.

Post the POPLA appeal in this post for critique, appeal as keeper and refer to the driver as 'the driver'
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
siouxie
post Fri, 12 Jan 2018 - 12:02
Post #3


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 11 Jan 2018
Member No.: 95,906



Hi Kommando - many thanks for your reply.

My sons' draft POPLA appeal letter will be something like this but obviously any advise will be gratefully received:

Smart Parking PCN:XXXXXXXXXX
POPLA Verification Code: XXXXXXXXXX

Sirs,

As the Keeper of the vehicle I received the above PCN from Smart Parking on 7 December 2017.

I appealed against this on 8 December 2017, providing them with all the relevant details.

They responded on 5 January 2018 stating that they have considered the appeal but have decided to uphold the PCN.

I am therefore appealing against this on the following grounds:

1. I am the Keeper of the vehicle but was not the driver.
2. The driver borrowed the vehicle for a meeting and in haste to pay inputted their VRN into the machine and the parking ticket coincides exactly with the date and times on the ANPR images.
3. This was a genuine error and the landowner suffered no loss of revenue for this mistake. In fact 4 hours were paid for and only 2 hrs 45 minutes were used.

On the basis of this, will you please consider my appeal against this PCN.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Fri, 12 Jan 2018 - 13:11
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,977
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



No, that is admitting it was the drivers fault.

Look at the Notice to Keeper and see if it complies with the requirements of the Protection of freedoms Act, particularly paragraph 9. It list all the items that must be in the NTK to make the keeper liable. Miss one and they can only go after the driver, who they don't know.

If in doubt post up the NTK after removing identifying detail so that others can comment. If Smart get POFA wrong then POPLA will uphold his appeal.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Fri, 12 Jan 2018 - 13:50
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16,360
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



MSE forum "newbies" thread, stuck at the top of the forum (abotu 3 pages down)

Has links to some EXAMPLE POPLA appeals. Read, read, read and adapt.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cabbyman
post Fri, 12 Jan 2018 - 14:35
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5,407
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
From: Hampshire
Member No.: 16,066



That appeal needs to be 4000+ words. Draft and post here for checking. No rush.

Check the expiry date of the POPLA code here: http://www.parkingcowboys.co.uk/popla-code-checker/ DO NOT use anything else from that site. It's not as good as us and MSE.

To be safe, the POPLA appeal needs to be sent, electronically, a couple of days before the end, so, as I say, no panic. Take time to get it right.


--------------------
Cabbyman 8 PPCs 0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
siouxie
post Tue, 16 Jan 2018 - 17:04
Post #7


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 11 Jan 2018
Member No.: 95,906



Thanks everyone for your helpful advice. Following on from Ostell's response, I am posting up a blanked out copy of the PCN to see if it complies with PoFA as was suggested. My son and I are finding it difficult to understand if it does or doesn't comply, and the wordage doesn't mention "the keeper".

They state "by either not purchasing the appropriate parking time or by remaining in the car park longer than permitted, in accordance with the Terms and Conditions set out in the signage", but this is not actually true. The driver did purchase the appropriate parking time but by not inputting the correct registration, it was this action which appears to be the issue, as this was not in accordance with the T & C's and Smart have cited that in their response to his initial appeal. However as the owners of the land, haven't actually suffered any loss by this action, we fail to see what the problem is but more specifically how we appeal to POPLA citing that.
Attached Image


Your help and advice would be gratefully received and we've have taken on board the comments regarding not rushing with our POPLA appeal as it doesn't have to be received until early Feb.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Tue, 16 Jan 2018 - 17:27
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 27,687
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



Don’t mention loss to POPLA - they will reply Beavis means it doesn’t matter.

Their PCN’s do not seek nor comply with PoFA. Long appeals are ok but you will win asserting this and that they would need to show the keeper was driving. Bonus if the keeper can state they were not.


--------------------
RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution
PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Tue, 16 Jan 2018 - 17:32
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,977
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



Another Golden PCN !!

This is POFA that allows for the keeper to be held liable. As there was no windscreen ticket then the notice has to comply with paragraph 9. If you look at 9 (2) this is a list of things that MUST be on the PCN. Yours is short quite a few.

So your appeal to POLA will consist of listing all the items they forgot to put on the form and therefore did not comply with POFA and therefore the keeper cannot be held liable.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
siouxie
post Fri, 26 Jan 2018 - 13:43
Post #10


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 11 Jan 2018
Member No.: 95,906



Hi again
Following on from all of your wise advice, we have now drafted what we consider to be a suitable appeal to POPLA and are posting it here in order to receive any further advice before our deadline of next Friday.
We have however ignored my son’s earlier appeal that he was not the driver and that the wrong VRN was entered as that clearly isn’t going to be particularly relevant and have concentrated more on Smart’s non POFA compliant PCN to him as keeper, as you will see. Have we covered all of the relevant non POFA (9) related items?
Will Smart be able to use that against my son’s appeal as he did not mention the notice being non POFA 2012 at the time of his appeal to them?
Any adjustments or advice will as always be gratefully received.

We have entered our responses to each Paragraph clauses in italics but cannot seem to do this on this posting.


Smart Parking PCN:XXXXXXXXXX
POPLA Verification Code: XXXXXXXXXX
Sirs,
I appeal as the Keeper of VRN XXXX XXX, to the PCN as above which was issued to me by Smart Parking on 5 December 2017. I appealed against this and they have subsequently upheld their PCN.

Consequently they have advised that I have a right to appeal to POPLA.

As stated I am the Keeper of the vehicle but was not the driver at the time of the time of the alleged parking offence.

I maintain that Smart Parking’s Parking Charge Notice Number: XXXXXXXXXX issued to me is non POFA Compliant.

In order for me as the Keeper to be held liable, certain criteria must be specified within the PCN and I therefore refer as follows:
POFA 2012 Schedule 4.

Paragraph 6(1) The second condition is that the creditor (or a person acting on behalf of the creditor):-
(b) has given a notice to keeper in accordance with Paragraph 9.

Paragraph 9(1) A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to keeper for the purposes of Paragraph 6(1)(b) is given in accordance with this paragraph, if the following requirements are met.

(2) The Notice must –
(a) Specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which it relates.
The PCN issued does not specify the vehicle but relies solely on the ANPR camera image as evidence which only provides the VRN. Neither does it state the period of parking to
which it relates, as it again relies on the ANPR camera image times and for it to be deduced from that image.[/i][/i][/b]
(b) inform the keeper that the driver is required to pay parking charges in respect of the specified period of parking and that the parking charges have not been paid in
full.
The PCN issued does not specifically state that the driver is required to pay the parking charges and neither does it state the specified period of parking as (2)(a) above.[/u]
[/u]
Most importantly the Parking Charge Notice issued to me as the keeper does not comply with sub paragraph

9(2)(f): warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given-
(i) The amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under paragraph (d) has not been paid in full, and
(ii) The Creditor does not know both the name and current address for service for the driver,
the creditor will (if all of the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the driver so much of that mount as remains unpaid;

No warning of this appears anywhere on the Parking Charge Notice issued to me the keeper.

So in conclusion, as the keeper of the vehicle and the appellant, I feel that Smart Parking Ltd., as the operator has failed to adhere to the conditions outlined under POFA 2012 and this therefore breaches the documented legislation and that the claim by them is invalid and that I am therefore not liable.




Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Fri, 26 Jan 2018 - 14:18
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,977
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



Fully specify POFA the first time you use then simply POFA afterwards "Schedule 4 of The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA)"

Make it obvious that the period of parking is not measured by the cameras as at that time the car was moving and not parking.


Keep it simple and explain everything. Remember this is POFA. Janet and John style of writing is required.

This post has been edited by ostell: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 - 14:19
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
siouxie
post Wed, 7 Feb 2018 - 12:04
Post #12


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 11 Jan 2018
Member No.: 95,906



biggrin.gif

Hi everyone,

Just to let you know that we did exactly as suggested:
Basically sent appeal on 30 Jan - as Keeper to POPLA, a couple of days before the deadline . Just altered some of the wording - kept it simple but clear based on Smart PCN not conforming to POFA 9.2 etc and didn't mention anything about the wrong VRM.

Just had a response from POPLA to say Smart didn't want to proceed - RESULT!!!!

Thanks to everyone who provided advice - it's a real learning curve.
[size="4"]

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SchoolRunMum
post Wed, 7 Feb 2018 - 19:51
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,428
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Member No.: 32,130



Smart are so easy to beat at POPLA, it's most amusing. Wish everyone knew how to do this and not pay them.

Well done!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Sunday, 27th May 2018 - 12:07
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.