OK. So you've shown us the NtK and it is not PoFA compliant although it pretends to be. That is only useful if the driver has not been identified.
At this point, I'm assuming you are the registered keeper of the vehicle and the NtK is addressed to you, the keeper. If not, please clarify your relationship to this situation.
You need to understand a couple of things first... assuming you are the keeper of the vehicle and the NtK is addressed to you, then you are the "Keeper", which is a legal entity. There is another separate legal entity... the "Driver".
So, for the time being, Smart Parking have no idea who the "driver" is so they have sent out an NtK to the "keeper", who they know is you because they got your data from the DVLA because the car is registered to you, the "Keeper".
So, a person can be either the "keeper" the "driver" or "both". Smart Parking only know the identity of the "keeper". However, it is the "driver" who is liable for the alleged breach of contract with Smart. The only way they can recover the charge if they do not know the identity of the "drive", is if they fully comply with all the requirements of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA).
As their NtK is not fully compliant with PoFA, they cannot hold the "keeper" liable if they don't know the identity of the "driver". However, if the "keeper" has blabbed, inadvertently or otherwise, that they were also the "driver", then the fact that their NtK I not PoFA compliant goes out the window.
If the "keeper" has not identified the "driver" and there is no legal obligation for the "keeper" to do so, then Smart have no wriggle room and can only pursue the "driver", who, if they have not been told, they have no idea who that is. Catch-22 for Smart (not so).
So, from what we can glean from what you have told us so far and looking at what appears to be an appeal where you said (as the "keeper") "I moved my car to a parking space in order not to block your narrow driveway for other cars...", you have inadvertently admitted to also being the "driver". If you'd said "The driver moved the car to a parking space...", the drivers identity would not have been revealed.
So, when you talk about an "appeal", are you referring to the POPLA appeal? If so, what is the date on the rejection letter from the initial appeal you appear to have made and included a POPLA code?
By appeal I mean initial appeal to Smart Parking itself.
By appeal I mean initial appeal to Smart Parking itself.
So, what did you mean when you posted this?:
Unortuantely I have acepted that it was me, thedriver.
emails:
from me:
I have received a "Parking Charge Notice" Ref: 3193920.
I would like to obtain footage of the claimed events.
I had a disabled person and 2 elderly in my car, who were out of the car to get rest ,after a long trip from London.
The rest for them was needed while I inquired directions from, I suppose, a dry cleaner/laundrette.
I moved my car to a parking space in order not to block your narrow driveway for other cars, while walking into the dry cleaner for an assistance with the orientation to the place.
Please provide me with the video record and thank you for your help.
from them:
Local Parking Security via smartparkingltd.onmicrosoft.com
Mon, Oct 7, 6:07 AM (3 days ago)
to me
Thank you for your Appeal/Enquiry. Please be advised your Appeal/Enquiry will be reviewed and responded to within 28 days. Please note if you are appealing against a Parking Charge Notice which has already been passed onto Debt Recovery Plus/Gladstones Solicitors, you will need to contact them directly. Kind Regards, Local Parking Security Ltd Local Parking Security Ltd • PO Box 6321 • Warwick • Warwickshire • CV34 9QB • 💻- www.localparkingsecurity.co.uk http://www.localparkingsecurity.co.uk •
Confused, I am.
By appeal I mean initial appeal to Smart Parking itself.
So, what did you mean when you posted this?:
Unortuantely I have acepted that it was me, thedriver.
emails:
from me:
I have received a "Parking Charge Notice" Ref: 3193920.
I would like to obtain footage of the claimed events.
I had a disabled person and 2 elderly in my car, who were out of the car to get rest ,after a long trip from London.
The rest for them was needed while I inquired directions from, I suppose, a dry cleaner/laundrette.
I moved my car to a parking space in order not to block your narrow driveway for other cars, while walking into the dry cleaner for an assistance with the orientation to the place.
Please provide me with the video record and thank you for your help.
from them:
Local Parking Security via smartparkingltd.onmicrosoft.com
Mon, Oct 7, 6:07 AM (3 days ago)
to me
Thank you for your Appeal/Enquiry. Please be advised your Appeal/Enquiry will be reviewed and responded to within 28 days. Please note if you are appealing against a Parking Charge Notice which has already been passed onto Debt Recovery Plus/Gladstones Solicitors, you will need to contact them directly. Kind Regards, Local Parking Security Ltd Local Parking Security Ltd • PO Box 6321 • Warwick • Warwickshire • CV34 9QB • - www.localparkingsecurity.co.uk http://www.localparkingsecurity.co.uk •
Confused, I am.
I asked for footage.
sorry for confusing you.
Since I did not mention that I have appealed but that i asked for footage I hoped it was clear that i did not appeal.
Could you advice on what basis i could appeal .I'll do it (bearing in my mind my grammar).
So, which bit of this in their response to you makes you think they did not take your request as an appeal?
Thank you for your Appeal/Enquiry. Please be advised your Appeal/Enquiry will be reviewed and responded to within 28 days.
Whilst you claim it was an "enquiry", they seem to lump an appeal and an enquiry together.
Have 28 days passed since you made your "enquiry"? If not, why did you think that appealing before a response would serve any purpose?
So, which bit of this in their response to you makes you think they did not take your request as an appeal?
Thank you for your Appeal/Enquiry. Please be advised your Appeal/Enquiry will be reviewed and responded to within 28 days.
Whilst you claim it was an "enquiry", they seem to lump an appeal and an enquiry together.
Have 28 days passed since you made your "enquiry"? If not, why did you think that appealing before a response would serve any purpose?
In my mind it was an enquiry.
When i asked for footage would it be regarded an appeal?
If so, I want to rectify it and appeal.
You can try and appeal and see what they say. Use the following as your appeal. No need to embellish or remove anything from it:
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 Parking 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 Parking have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
You can try and appeal and see what they say. Use the following as your appeal. No need to embellish or remove anything from it:
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 Parking 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 Parking have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
thank you,that is very kind.
thank you all.
PCN cancelled.
Winner x 1
View List