Smart parking. Bentley bridge Wednesfield, Lent the car to a relative who works there Options

[mrbarry]

I have been here a few times over the years to peruse the information, this is the first time I have felt the need to post however.

My wife has received a ticket via the post for going over the 3 hour limit on the car park at a local shopping centre. It’s an out door car park run by smart parking ltd.
A brief synopsis; her brother, who works on the retail park, had borrowed her car whilst his was undergoing repairs. He is entitled to park there free of charge for as long as required whilst he is at work. As if they would check his work hours against his parking but that’s the idea.
On the day in question he forgot to inform them of the fact he wasn’t in his own car, so their ANPR system fires a ticket out to our home.
He has approached Smart Parking and they have added her number plate for future parking, (a good thing for us I guess as it’s directly opposite our local hospital), but they informed him it is my wife who has to appeal the ticket as it was issued to her not to him.

I have looked on this site and it seems Smart Parking are unlikely to chaise if the ticket is ignored but I’d rather go the route of appeal if it’s easy enough.

My questions are:

As it was not her driving/parking is she liable for the ticket?

Can they insist she informs them who was driving and would her brother be liable?

Who do I appeal to first? POLPA, or reply to Smart Parking, or both, or perhaps someone else?

I have looked on the BPA website and SP appear to be approved members but have no back office or debt collection. Unsure but this sounds as though they don’t have a debt recovery department.

I know in law that parking fines are a bit squiffy because the contract is assumed and not agreed, who signs a contract when they park a car? I also know that any ambiguity in a legal contract falls in favour of the party who did not draw up the contract. I would appreciate some more experienced input however because I’m no expert her by any means.

Thanks in advance.

This post has been edited by mrbarry: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 - 16:58

[Advertisement]

[ostell]

They can hold her liable as the keeper if they comply with the requirements of POFA. (Smart usually aren't too smart for this). Giving the driver details will remove any liability from her. She is not required to identify the driver. The contract is formed by reading the signs that are there and then parking.

Can the driver not get his employer to require Smart to cancel as it was an employee, usually white listed, that was parking?

Post up the redacted PCN but leave dates.

You have to appeal to Smart first who will give you a code for POPLA when they reject.

This post has been edited by ostell: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 - 17:09

[Jlc]

As it was not her driving/parking is she liable for the ticket?

If they have complied with the Protection of Freedoms Act then they can pursue the keeper for the driver's unpaid parking charge. (Hold this thought)

Can they insist she informs them who was driving and would her brother be liable?

Nope. If he is named then they can pursue him.

Who do I appeal to first? POLPA, or reply to Smart Parking, or both, or perhaps someone else?

You have to appeal to the parking company first. Parking companies simply reject appeals unless they know they're going to lose at the next step (POPLA).

I know in law that parking fines are a bit squiffy because the contract is assumed and not agreed, who signs a contract when they park a car? I also know that any ambiguity in a legal contract falls in favour of the party who did not draw up the contract. I would appreciate some more experienced input however because I’m no expert her by any means.

Not really squiffy at all. ParkingEye took it to the Supreme Court and 'simple' overstays are very much enforceable.


Anyway, now back to the important stuff. Smart do not usually comply with Protection of Freedoms Act and will fold with the correct appeal: (But let's see a redacted copy of the notice to confirm first)

Dear Sirs,

I have just received your Notice to Keeper xxxxx for vehicle VRM xxxx

You have failed to comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 of The Protection Of Freedoms Act 2012 namely, but not limited to, failing to give the invitation to keeper in the format prescribed by section 9 (2) (e) of the Act. You cannot, therefore, transfer liability for the alleged charge from the driver at the time to me, the keeper.

There is no legal requirement to name the driver at the time and I will not be doing so.

I do not expect to hear from you again, or your debt collectors, except to confirm that no further action will be taken on this matter and my personal details have been removed from your records.

Yours etc

[mrbarry]

He works at pure gym and they are closed due to the current covid situation. I have not yet asked him if he has contacted them. There is a security hut on site and he said he was going to see them first because that’s who sort number plate registers. I’ll message him now.

It appears he emailed his manager at the gym who emailed SP.

[Jlc]

They should be able to sort it but don't miss out on appealing as they won't stop pestering.

[mrbarry]

Ok thanks. Do we just reply to the letter to appeal? Any words of wisdom worth putting in the letter?

Incidentally it isn’t the money as much as the principle I’m bothered about. If We win the appeal I will make a donation to cancer research because I’d rather pay them than SP!

In the defence of SP their signage etc is clear, this is simply an oversight on his part.

[ostell]

As asked already post up a redacted copy of the PCN but leave dates.

The appeal in post #3 is the general format that will be used but until we see the PCN we do know what fails they have

[mrbarry]

I have no idea how but I managed to read the first line of the post where you asked for that and skip the rest entirely. I’m going to blame madness or my phone 🤦🏼‍♂️

Anyway, here is a copy, it’s poor quality but it’s all I have on me, I will be home From work in under an hour and I can get a better picture.

Thanks again.

Attached thumbnail(s)

 

[Jlc]

They don't even attempt keeper liability.

From the dates they are over 14 days too...

An online appeal should be fine (as the keeper).

[ostell]

Yep That appeal should do it but if the decide to reject and you have to take it to POPLA then you will need to list all the fails. I haven't seen a PCN that misses so much for a long time. Check for yourself. Here's POFA: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9...edule/4/enacted . Look at paragraph 9 and 9 (2) in particular. How many of the required statements are missing or incorresct

[The Rookie]

I haven't seen a PCN that misses so much for a long time.

Actually this looks like they are adopting a similar approach to PE (who's non PoFA NtK contain as many misses I'd suggest), where they know they are non compliant with PoFA making no effort to try and state any keeper liability or smoke and mirrors at all.

I do wonder if some PPCs are getting a bit cautious about possible legal (crim or civil) ramifications of claiming something they know will have no right to claim.

[mrbarry]

I was trying to help her last week and she got stroppy telling me she knows what she’s doing. I’ve refused to help now she can get on with it. I do know she plans simply ignoring the letter but I’m not remotely interested any longer. I only know she’s ignoring it because she told her mate on the phone she had had no more letters and would simply carry on ignoring it. I’d have been happy to do some research and learn a bit too, I’ve always been up for these sort of things.

Thanks for all the help tho, I appreciate it if the wife doesn’t.

[Jlc]

Generally Smart can be ignored - but if there's a 100% guaranteed appeal point to get it cancelled, why not?

They raise very few court claims and there is a good defence here - but why risk the hassle? (Other firms do sue every ticket)

This post has been edited by Jlc: Wed, 8 Apr 2020 - 10:54

[ostell]

So come back when she get a letter before claim