-
“ Private” Smart Parking Court Claim Received – Retail Park Short Stay
Posted by Lolalux on 16 May, 2026 13:59 -
Hi all,
I’m looking for advice after receiving what appears to be a County Court claim relating to a private parking charge (smart parking)from February 2023.
The vechile was parked at a retail park while quickly returning an item to one of the shops. The car park was almost completely empty at the time.
The driver genuinely believed there would be a short grace period allowed to enter, park, read any signs, and briefly use the shops. I now understand the car park tariff was around 40p for an hour and, in hindsight, the driver should probably have paid it. However, I was only there very briefly and the alleged stay was around 20 minutes in total.
A Parking Charge Notice was later issued for around £80. I ignored the later debt letters and no longer have most of them.
I have now received HMCTS / County Court paperwork and I’m unsure whether this is worth defending or whether I should settle it.
My main concerns are:
the stay was very short,
the car park was/ is always largely empty,
I do not recall seeing clear signage,
and the charge feels disproportionate given the parking tariff was only around 40p.
Any advice on next steps would be appreciated.
https://ibb.co/yTFFdgX
https://ibb.co/dsQd0b6c -
-
There is a “consideration period”. But not to allow you to park for free. 5 or 10 minutes in any case.
What did the PCN from Smart say?
If you don’t have it, get it, eg through a Subject Access Request as a matter of urgency.
Get pictures of the signs also if you think they are inadequate. -
-
I have just emailed smart parking for this.
I’m unsure about signage now. It’s been a while since I’ve parked there and I would have have guessed after 3 years it would be updated/ changed -
-
Quick update:
I have now received the SAR from Smart Parking.
The ANPR images show:
* Entry: 12:07:51
* Exit: 12:25:43
So the total time on site was around 17 minutes.
I have attached:
* the original 2023 Smart Parking signage/T&Cs from the SAR,
* the PCN timings,
* and current photos of the car park layout/signage taken this week.
The site now appears to use different signage/operator branding (“Hozah” / UK Parking Administration Ltd), so I appreciate the current signage may not exactly match the 2023 setup.
DCB Legal have also confirmed the claim is currently “on hold” while they review matters further with their client.
I would appreciate any thoughts on:
* adequacy/prominence of signage,
* grace/consideration periods,
* ANPR timing,
* and whether 17 minutes total stay is realistically defensible in these circumstances.
Also want to mention a huge thank you for your help.
https://ibb.co/KjZ1cwfj
https://ibb.co/RG2yFhRL
https://ibb.co/ccY3CbVN
https://ibb.co/WWFBw3gX -
-
Nothing attached. -
-
The original Notice to Keeper is out of time for keeper liability so should be easy to defend.
Can we assume that the vehicle driver has never been revealed to Smart Parking? -
-
You have to file a defence or Acknowledgment of Service by 1 June
If you do the latter, your deadline for filing a defence becomes 15 June
As @InterCity125 has observed, if the driver has not been identified then the registered keeper can not be held liable because Smart has failed to meet the requirements of PoFA 2012, specifically by not sending the Notice to Keeper to arrive within 14 days.
If you’ve not already done so, file the AoS now, defend in full, no counterclaim. -
-
Or you could (given how simple it is) just enter the defence now;
1. The Defendant denies the claim in its entirety and no debt is owed to the Claimant.
2. It is acknowledged that I was the Registered Keeper of the vehicle at the material time.
3. The Claimant is unable to identify the driver at the material time and there is no legal obligation for the vehicle keeper to provide this information to the Claimant and I will not be doing so under any circumstance.
4. The Claimant appears to be relying on Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) (2012) which allows them to transfer liability from the unknown driver to the Registered Keeper but ONLY when the strict requirements of the legislation are met.
5. That, in this instance, the Claimant is unable to meet the requirements of PoFA as the Claimant's Notice to Keeper (NtK) was not delivered to the Registered Keeper within the statutory timeframe of 14 days from the date of the alleged parking event.
6. That the Claimant's issued NtK shows that the alleged parking event took place on 7th February 2023 but the notice was not even issued until 23rd February 2023 - this is very obviously beyond the 14 day period.
7. That with the Claimant unable to either identify the driver or rely on PoFA there is no legal route to liability in this matter. -
-
Thank you both so much.
the driver has not been identified to the Claimant.
I have completed the AoS and will now begin preparing the defence based on the points raised above.
Really appreciate the help. -
-
No problem.
Remember to keep this very simple and make it super easy for the Judge.
I would pretty much copy and paste the defence - nothing more to add apart from the formalities.
-
-
Update on Smart Parking / DCB claim.
My defence was filed on 31 May based mainly on Smart Parking failing PoFA keeper liability requirements (parking event 07/02/2023, NTK issued 23/02/2023 — outside 14 days).
DCB Legal have now confirmed they are proceeding and have sent me their completed N180. They have ticked:
* Yes to mediation
* Yes to determination without a hearing
* Claimant’s home court
I’m waiting for my own N180 from the court.
Does anything in DCB’s N180 change the advice, and should I still tick NO to paper determination when mine arrives? -
-
Yes - You need to ask for a physical hearing and not determination without a hearing.
Search the forum for N180s and you'll find the textbook answers.
DCB Legal will discontinue before the have to pay the hearing fee.
This is purely tactical from their perspective. -
-
Hello everyone 😊
I’ve now received a mediation appointment for …. September 2026 (13:30–16:30).
I was just hoping for a little guidance on what to expect next.
1. Does mediation change anything in relation to my defence, or should I simply maintain my position that Smart Parking cannot rely on keeper liability under PoFA and have not identified the driver?
2. Is it still fairly common for Smart Parking/DCB Legal to discontinue cases before or after mediation where the defence is based on a PoFA issue like this?
3. If they do make a settlement offer during mediation, would it be reasonable for me to say that I would only consider settling for the original £100 parking charge, rather than the full amount claimed?
Thank you again for all your time and help—it really has been invaluable.
💜 -
-
Search the forum.
In particular for "mediation".
Do not discuss your defence, other than saying that you stand by it.
Search the forum.
DCB Legal will eventually discontinue, but not before/after mediation.
If you want to offer something to settle, that's up to you, but if you search the forum you will see the general advice is to offer £0 and that eventually the case will be discontinued.
Seriously - please - we can help you but you also have to help yourself. The forum is a mine of information. -
-
I would reiterate that your offer is £0.
The mediator should not probe your defence.
They will discontinue but you need to go through the process. -
ImgBB 
Love x 1
View List
Love x 1
View List
Agree x 1
Love x 1
View List
Love x 1
View List