Free Traffic Legal Advice

They might refer to the Protection of Freedoms Act, but they've not complied with it! One of the requirements is to deliver a notice within 14 days. They sent theirs on day 14, and it is presumed delivered 2 working days later, too late to hold the keeper liable!

Are you the registered keeper of the vehicle? If so, appeal online as the keeper only (choosing 'other' under reason for appeal) with the below:



If appealing online, be careful there are no drop down/tick boxes that cause you to identify who was driving, and keep a close eye on your spam folder for their response. If they do not respond within 28 days, chase them.

Their misrepresentation is grounds for complaint - you could complain now, but my personal recommendation would be to wait for them to respond to your appeal. I'll explain my reasoning - when they respond, they are likely to reject your appeal, as jfollows says above, citing their false claim that the notice must be 'issued' within 14 days, which is not true.

This doubling down by them rules out the possibility of the inclusion of the PoFA wording on the PCN being a simple honest mistake, and exposes them as deliberately misrepresenting their position, strengthening your complaint.

Wow. You guys are super helpful.

Thanks so much.

I'll get all this done and report back what happens.

I submitted a Smart Parking appeal earlier this week by coincidence - the only data you have to provide on the online form that you don't have to provide when submitting by post is your email address. The only other information required is your name and address, which they already have.

If you have sent it by post, I hope you acquired a free certificate of posting from the post office, so that you have evidence that you sent it, if they subsequently claim not to have received it.

I know the Royal Mail isn't the best nowadays, but I think someone is telling porkies.

They'll be using a third party mail consolidator which are often somewhat slower.

I have received this back::


Having considered your appeal in detail we have decided to uphold the Parking Charge (PC) as we
believe that it was correctly issued in accordance with the terms and conditions advertised within the
area concerned. As your appeal was received within the initial discount period, we have extended the
discount period until 04/06/2025.
As you were informed in our initial correspondence, we can confirm that the above parking charge was
issued under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA 2012). The parking contravention occurred
on 14.04.2025, the registered keeper details were received on 24.04.2025, after which the Parking
Charge (PC) was promptly issued within the 14 days required under POFA 2012. You were also invited
to provided us with the driver’s full name and current postal address, if you were not the driver at the
time of the parking event.
If you wish to provided driver details please send them via email to:

COD@smartparking.com

In the event that you fail to provide these details, we will use the provisions under POFA, 2012, and
continue to pursue you the registered keeper, for the outstanding balance.
Failure to provide these details, will result in Smart Parking using the provisions under POFA, 2012 to
pursue you, the registered keeper, for the outstanding balance of the PC.

It looks like they have sent the POPLA ref number

Failure to provide these details, will result in Smart Parking using the provisions under POFA, 2012 to
pursue you, the registered keeper, for the outstanding balance of the PC.
We can confirm that the contravention of insufficient paid time occurred as our payment system confirms
that no payment was made for your vehicle registration, for the 20 minutes the vehicle remained on site.
Please be advised that as detailed on the car park signage when visiting this site, all motorists must
purchase a valid ticket by entering the full and correct vehicle registration mark into the payment
machine/ an alternate payment method, ensuring a payment is made for the full required stay duration.
Subsequently, as you have failed to pay for your visit you have breached the advertised Terms and
Conditions and as a result we can confirm that we have no option but to uphold the PC. The Terms and
Conditions of the car park are clearly advertised around the site and must be adhered to by all drivers.
We wish to inform that the car park in question is operated by ANPR cameras which capture images of
your vehicle entering and exiting the site, which subsequently calculates your total stay duration. This
information is then paired with the information entered into the payment machine/alternate payment
option, to ensure the correct payment has been made against the full and correct vehicle registration
for the total duration the vehicle is on site - this is calculated from the time of entrance to the time of
exit.
You have now reached the end of our internal appeals procedure and therefore you now have two options, you can pay or appeal further with POPLA – you cannot do both.
The Appellant has the right to appeal to an Independent Appeals Service, POPLA (Parking on Private
Land Appeals) using the POPLA Verification Number provided below. Please note, should you decide
to appeal to POPLA and your appeal is subsequently rejected, the option to pay a discounted amount
will no longer be available and the full amount of the PC will be due.
The verification number you will need to appeal is 8511XXXXXX. If the appellant decides to appeal to
POPLA, they will need to visit the website, www.popla.co.uk where further details of how to appeal
(either online or by downloading the relevant forms) can be found. If the appellant is unable to access
the website, please contact us for further information on how to obtain the forms. Please ensure that
the POPLA Verification Number as noted above is quoted in all correspondence to POPLA. The
appellant has 28 days from the date of this letter to submit an appeal to POPLA.
By law we are also required to inform you that Ombudsman Services (www.ombudsman-services.org/)
provides an alternative dispute resolution service that would be competent to deal with your appeal.
However, we have not chosen to participate in their alternative dispute resolution service. As such
should you wish to appeal then you must do so to POPLA, as explained above.

Your POPLA appeal can be worded as below, with relevant personal details filled in. For your reason for appeal on the online portal, simply choose 'Other'. If it asks for your relationship to the vehicle, simply select 'Registered Keeper'. Create your appeal as a PDF document, and attach it to the portal under supporting evidence. In the actual appeal box, just put something along the lines of "Find attached the full appeal document".

POPLA Appeal

[NAME] (Registered Keeper) (Appellant)

-Vs-

Smart Parking (Operator)

Vehicle Registration Mark:[VRM]
 POPLA Reference Code: [POPLA REFERENCE]
 Parking Charge Notice Number: [PCN REFERENCE]

Case Overview:
I, [NAME], the registered keeper (“I”/“the Appellant”) of the above vehicle (VRM: _______), received a parking charge notice via post from Smart Parking (“the Operator”), which purported to be a Notice to Keeper. I appealed to the Operator, who acknowledged and subsequently rejected my appeal. It is my position that as the registered keeper of the vehicle I have no liability for the parking charge, and that my appeal should therefore be upheld. My appeal is on the following grounds:

1. No keeper liability: the Parking Charge Notice does not comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act (“PoFA”/“the Act”):
The operator does not not know the identity of the driver and is therefore seeking to recover the charge from me, the registered keeper of the vehicle. In order to be able to recover any unpaid charges from me as the registered keeper, the operator must comply with the requirements outlined in Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Smart Parking have failed to do so.

They have failed to deliver the notice to keeper within the relevant period of 14 days beginning with the day after that on which the specified period of parking ended, as specified by 9(5) of the Act.

Date of Parking: 14/04/2025
Date of PCN issue: 28/04/2025
Date of presumed service (2 working days after issue, as per 9(6) of the Act): 30/04/2025
Elapsed time period: 16 days

As Smart Parking are unable to rely on the provisions of PoFA to hold me liable as the keeper, and as there is no evidence as to who was driving, I cannot be held liable for the charge, and my appeal should be upheld.

2. Breach of the PPSSCoP - Misrepresentation

The parking charge notice issued by Smart Parking claimed that they would be able to hold me liable as the registered keeper, under the provisions of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act, despite the fact they were aware (or ought to have been aware) that they had not complied with the relevant conditions to do so. Following my appeal pointing this out, Smart Parking doubled down on their stance, claiming that the charge was 'issued within the 14 days required under POFA 2012', despite the fact that PoFA requires the notice to be given (that is, delivered) within 14 days, not merely issued within 14 days.

This repeated misrepresentation is in direct contravention of section 8.1.1 (d) of the Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice, which states:

8.1.1 The parking operator must not serve a notice or include material on its website which in its design and/or language:

a) implies or would cause the recipient to infer statutory authority where none
exists;
b) deliberately resembles a public authority civil enforcement penalty charge
notice;
c) uses prohibited terminology as set out in Annex E; or
d) state the keeper is liable under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 where they cannot be held liable.

For the reasons outlined above, it is clear that as the registered keeper I have no liability for this charge, and I request that my appeal is upheld.

Once you have submitted the appeal, it will be sent to Smart for them to respond. When they respond, you'll have 7 days to comment on their evidence. Show us their response when you have it and we can advise.

You should also complaint to Smart Parking about their misrepresentation of PoFA. This is an emerging pattern where they falsely claim that merely issuing a notice to keeper within 14 days satisfies the requirements, when it does not. Smart will fob you off, but you can then complain to the British Parking Association, the trade association that Smart Parking are members of.

A suggested wording for your complaint is below. It should be sent to complaints@smartparking.com

Subject: Formal Complaint, PCN #[REFERENCE]

Dear Sirs,

For the avoidance of doubt, this is not an appeal against a parking charge (one has been submitted separately) but is instead a formal complaint regarding your handling of my case.

I am writing to make a formal complaint about your correspondence in respect of PCN #[REFERENCE], which amounts to a breach of the Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice (PPSSCoP) and, by virtue of this, your KADOE contract with the DVLA. 

Following receipt of your PCN, I appealed as the registered keeper, pointing out that due to your failure to deliver a Notice to Keeper within the relevant period of 14 days as required by Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA), you are unable to recover the charge from me as the keeper. You responded with a letter dated [DATE], falsely claiming that the notice was issued under PoFA. In the letter you claim:

"the Parking Charge (PC) was promptly issued within the 14 days required under POFA 2012"

As you will know, paragraph 9(4) of PoFA is clear that the notice must be given (that is, delivered), within 14 days, not merely issued within 14 days.

By falsely claiming otherwise, you are in breach of the PPSSCoP and the KADOE contract for the following reasons:

1. Breach of the PPSSCoP
Section 8.1.1 of the PPSSCoP states:

8.1.1 The parking operator must not serve a notice or include material on its website which in its design and/or language:

d) state the keeper is liable under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 where they cannot be held liable.

In the appeal, I explained that Smart Parking had failed to serve a notice compliant with the requirements of PoFA, having given the notice outside of the relevant period of 14 days. You then responded on [DATE] with a letter, claiming the ability to recover the charges from me under PoFA. This is a deliberate misrepresentation, and a breach of 8.1.1 of the PPSSCoP.

As per Annex H of the PPSSCoP, this constitutes at least a Level 1 sanction for non-conformance.

2. Breach of the KADOE Contract
Clause C1.1 of your KADOE Contract with DVLA states:

The Customer shall ensure that signage, terms and conditions of service for parking customers and correspondence with data subjects comply with the Law and with the requirements of the ATA’s Code of Practice or Conduct.

By knowingly and falsely claiming compliance with PoFA, you have failed to comply with the terms of your KADOE contract, bringing into question your suitability to have access to sensitive registered keeper data.

As a result of these serious failings you should:

• Confirm that the parking charge notice has been cancelled and that no further action will be taken
• Explain why your correspondence falsely claims the ability to recover charges under PoFA when you are, or ought to be, fully aware this is not true
• Issue a formal apology

I expect a response to my complaint within 14 days. Following your response, I reserve the right to escalate this matter to the British Parking Association, and the DVLA.

Yours etc...

Did you already send the complaint to the DVLA?