3. Smart Parking PCN – No Payment – Hotel/Restaurant Car Park
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic: Smart Parking PCN – No Payment – Hotel/Restaurant Car Park  (Read 1423 times)

0 Members and 110 Guests are viewing this topic.

Smart Parking PCN – No Payment – Hotel/Restaurant Car Park
« on: »
Hello all,

I’ve received a Notice to Keeper (NTK) from Smart Parking (BPA member), relating to an alleged parking contravention in a car park designated for hotel and restaurant guests. I’m posting here to understand the strength of my case before appealing to the parking company or POPLA. The Situation:
  • The driver entered the car park and stayed for 19 minutes.
  • No payment was made by the driver.
  • The driver was not a guest of the hotel or restaurant.
  • From what I understand, the signage was unclear in establishing that by entering the car park, the driver was entering into a contract and that failure to comply could result in a charge.
  • As the registered keeper, I received a NTK through the post dated 12/05/2025.
I believe the signage failed to adequately inform the driver of any contractual obligation or potential charges. There was nothing that obviously stated entering the area alone would be considered as acceptance of contract terms, or that there would be charges for non-compliance.

My Questions:
  • Do I have a strong enough case to appeal to Smart Parking (initial appeal), and potentially POPLA if rejected?
  • Would sending the Parking Cowboys NTK template be suitable as a first step, or should I customise the appeal with my specific points about unclear signage?
I’ve attached:
  • Photos of NTK.
  • Photos of signage at the car park (entrance and interior).
  • A link to the car park on Google Street View: link.
  • A screenshot of Parking Cowboys Template:

Thanks in advance for your help and advice.

Logged

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook

Re: Smart Parking PCN – No Payment – Hotel/Restaurant Car Park
« Reply #1 on: »
No.
The Notice to Keeper was issued too late to be able to hold the keeper liable in place of the driver.
Do not identify the driver.
Appeal on the basis of the late service of the NtK (examples here) and although the appeal will be rejected, use the POPLA code which will be provided to get the invoice cancelled.

The template appeal you have posted is basically pants. Don’t use it.

Smart is especially incompetent in frequently being unable to serve its NtKs in time, but does so anyway knowing that a good percentage of recipients pay up anyway. Smart also makes unjustified claims that it complies with the legislation when it clearly does not do. Expect any of this sort of nonsense in response.
« Last Edit: May 18, 2025, 02:33:07 pm by jfollows »
Logged
Re: Smart Parking PCN – No Payment – Hotel/Restaurant Car Park
« Reply #2 on: »
Quote from: jfollows on May 18, 2025, 02:16:29 pm
Appeal on the basis of the late service of the NtK
Thank you! Didn't realize they had only up to 14 days to inform the registered keeper.
Logged
Re: Smart Parking PCN – No Payment – Hotel/Restaurant Car Park
« Reply #3 on: »
Quote from: WaffleJet on May 18, 2025, 02:36:15 pm
Quote from: jfollows on May 18, 2025, 02:16:29 pm
Appeal on the basis of the late service of the NtK
Thank you! Didn't realize they had only up to 14 days to inform the registered keeper.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/contents
If they want to transfer liability from the (unknown) driver to the registered keeper.
The legislation replaced the ability of people to clamp cars and demand money, in return for which they can pursue the registered keeper as long as they comply with the legislation.
NtK presumed delivered 14/5, two business days after its submission. Well over 14 days later than 27/4.
« Last Edit: May 18, 2025, 02:49:31 pm by jfollows »
Logged
Re: Smart Parking PCN – No Payment – Hotel/Restaurant Car Park
« Reply #4 on: »
Here's an appeal you can use as the keeper:

Dear Sirs,

I have received your Parking Charge Notice (Ref: ____) for vehicle registration mark ____ ___, in which you allege that the driver has incurred a parking charge.  I note from your correspondence that you claim to be able to hold me liable under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ("the Act"), but this is not true. You have failed to deliver the notice within the relevant period of 14 days as required by paragraph 9(4) of the Act.

Date of parking: 27/04/25
Date of issue: 12/05/25
Date of presumed service under 9(6) of the Act: 14/05/25
Days elapsed: 17 days

I am appealing as the registered keeper. There is no obligation for me to name the driver and I will not be doing so. I am therefore unable to help you further with this matter, and look forward to your confirmation that the charge has been cancelled. If you choose to decline this appeal, you must issue a POPLA code.

Yours,

Appeal as the keeper only, select "Other" as the appeal reason on the website. Keep an eye on your spam folder for their response.

It'll be interesting to see what their response is... Their recent trick has been to (falsely) claim that simply issuing the notice within 14 days is sufficient (it isn't), but here they haven't even issued it within 14 days.

You should also complain to them and DVLA about this conduct... I'll dig out some wording you can use later.
Logged
Re: Smart Parking PCN – No Payment – Hotel/Restaurant Car Park
« Reply #5 on: »
Quote from: DWMB2 on May 18, 2025, 03:19:10 pm
Here's an appeal you can use as the keeper:
Makes sense, thanks a lot!
Also tried to use GPT and I think there could be an important point reflected in generated appeal about no Notice to Driver received:
I am the registered keeper of vehicle [registration number] and I am writing to appeal the above-referenced Parking Charge Notice.

The Parking Charge Notice alleges a parking event on 27 April 2025, and the Notice to Keeper is dated 12 May 2025. As no Notice to Driver has been received by the registered keeper, and there is no indication that one was served, Smart Parking must comply with Paragraph 9 of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (“PoFA”) to hold the registered keeper liable.

Paragraph 9(5) requires that a Notice to Keeper be delivered within 14 days of the date of the alleged contravention. Paragraph 9(6) of Schedule 4 states:

“A notice sent by post is to be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, to have been delivered (and so ‘given’ for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4)) on the second working day after the day on which it is posted.”

A notice posted on 12 May 2025 is presumed to have been delivered on 14 May 2025, which is 17 days after the alleged parking event. This is clearly outside the 14-day time limit required by PoFA.

Accordingly, as the statutory requirements for keeper liability have not been met, I cannot be held liable for this charge. I request that this Parking Charge Notice be cancelled.

Should you choose not to cancel the charge, please issue a POPLA code so I may escalate the matter to independent appeal.
Sorry if I'm missing something as it's the first time I'm trying to wrap my head around the law surrounding PPCs, but let me know what you think about it! To me the generated text seems a little too detailed given Smart Parking will reject the appeal anyway.
Logged
Re: Smart Parking PCN – No Payment – Hotel/Restaurant Car Park
« Reply #6 on: »
Thanks for sharing the template, used it for the appeal. Much appreciated!
Logged
Re: Smart Parking PCN – No Payment – Hotel/Restaurant Car Park
« Reply #7 on: »
The point around a notice to driver is an unnecessary addition. All it does is add length without adding substance.
I once asked ChatGPT how many time the letter 'r' appears in the word 'strawberry'. This was its response:



I'm not sure I'd use it to draft legal points for me.
Logged
Re: Smart Parking PCN – No Payment – Hotel/Restaurant Car Park
« Reply #8 on: »
+1.

The draft is waffle. For goodness sake, they've already opened the door for you if you'd care to look.

PCN Information
You are advised that........

..This Notice is given to you under paragraph 9(2)((f) [ so you telling them about a NTD is rather unnecessary!] ..and is subject to us complying with the applicable conditions under Schedule 4.


I refer to the PCN, in particular para.3 of the section headed PCN Information, and thank you for stating that your right to hold the keeper liable is subject to you 'complying with ....'.

As you will know, one of these applicable conditions is that:

(4) The notice [to Keeper] must be given by—

(a)handing it to the keeper, or leaving it at a current address for service for the keeper, within the relevant period; or

(b)sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period.

(5)The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 14 days beginning with the day after that on which the specified period of parking ended.

This PCN was in respect of a specified period of parking which occurred on ****.
The PCN was posted 15 days later (12 May) and presumed served on 14th, an elapsed period of 17 days.

Self-evidently you have not complied with para. 9(4)(b) therefore you are not able to hold the keeper liable. I look forward to receiving your confirmation.



Logged
Re: Smart Parking PCN – No Payment – Hotel/Restaurant Car Park
« Reply #9 on: »
+2

OP, stop trying to overthink this. Use the provided appeal and don't try to edit or alter it.

Also, as (not so) Smart have breached the PPSCoP, they have also breached their KADOE contract with the DVLA and are therefore using your data unlawfully. You should file a formal complaint to the DVLA. Please don't try to overthink this either. Just do it as it leaves a paper trail for future DVLA sanctions against this rogue operator.

Here’s how to make a DVLA complaint:

• Go to: https://contact.dvla.gov.uk/complaints
• Select: “Making a complaint or compliment about the Vehicles service you have received”
• Enter your personal details, contact details, and vehicle details
• Use the text box to summarise your complaint or insert a covering note
• You will then be able to upload a file (up to 19.5 MB) — this can be your full complaint or supporting evidence
That’s it.

The DVLA is required to record, investigate and respond to every complaint about a private parking company. If everyone who encounters a breach took the time to submit a complaint, we might finally see the DVLA take meaningful action—whether that means curtailing or removing KADOE access altogether.

For the text part of the complaint the webform could use the following:

Quote
I am submitting a formal complaint against Smart Parking Ltd, a BPA Accredited Operator Scheme member with DVLA KADOE access, for breaching the BPA/IPC Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP) after obtaining my personal data.

While Smart Parking may have had reasonable cause at the time of their KADOE request, their subsequent misuse of my data—through conduct that contravenes the PPSCoP—renders that use unlawful. The PPSCoP forms an integral part of the DVLA’s governance framework for data access by private parking firms. Continued access is conditional on compliance.

The DVLA, as data controller, is obliged under UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018 to investigate and take enforcement action when data is misused following release. This complaint is not about whether the data was obtained lawfully at the outset, but whether its subsequent use breached the terms under which it was provided.

I have prepared a supporting statement setting out the nature of the breach and the Operator’s actions, and I request a full investigation into this matter. I have attached the supporting document.

Please acknowledge receipt and confirm the reference number for this complaint.

Then you could upload the following as a PDF file for the formal complaint itself:

Quote
SUPPORTING STATEMENT

Complaint to DVLA – Breach of KADOE Contract and PPSCoP

Operator name: Smart Parking Ltd
Date of PCN issue: 12/05/2025
Vehicle registration: [INSERT VRM]

I am submitting this complaint to report a misuse of my personal data by Smart Parking Ltd, who obtained my keeper details from the DVLA under the KADOE (Keeper At Date Of Event) contract.

Although Smart Parking may have had reasonable cause to request my data initially, their subsequent use of that data is unlawful due to a serious breach of the BPA/IPC Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP). This Code forms part of the regulatory framework that governs the use of DVLA data by private parking firms.

The KADOE contract clearly states that data must only be used to pursue an unpaid parking charge in accordance with the applicable Code of Practice. Where the Code is breached, any continued use of keeper data ceases to be lawful.

In this case, Smart Parking Ltd breached Section 8.1.1(d) of the PPSCoP, which states:

"The parking operator must not serve a notice which in its design and/or language: state the keeper is liable under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 where they cannot be held liable."

Smart Parking issued a Notice to Keeper dated 12/05/2025 for an alleged contravention on 27/04/2025. This notice was deemed delivered (given) on 14/05/2025, beyond the 14-day relevant period set by PoFA Schedule 4, Paragraph 9(4)(b). Despite this, the notice falsely asserted that the Keeper is liable under PoFA 2012, referencing Paragraph 9(2)(b). This is misleading and in direct violation of the PPSCoP.

By falsely invoking PoFA to assert Keeper liability where it does not apply, Smart Parking have unlawfully processed my personal data for a purpose outside the bounds of both the KADOE contract and the DVLA’s data governance framework. This is not a minor or technical error — it represents a deliberate or negligent failure to comply with the standards required for continued access to DVLA data.

I am therefore requesting that the DVLA investigate this serious breach, and take appropriate enforcement action, which may include:

• Confirming that a breach has occurred
• Requiring corrective action or sanctioning the operator
• Suspending or revoking KADOE access if appropriate

I have retained a copy of the NtK as evidence and am happy to provide further information upon request.

Name: [INSERT YOUR NAME]
Date: [INSERT DATE]
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Re: Smart Parking PCN – No Payment – Hotel/Restaurant Car Park
« Reply #10 on: »
Hi all,

First of all I'd like to thank everyone who has provided their input and advice on this matter, I greatly appreciate it!
Today I received a reply from Smart Parking. As expected, the appeal was declined, however no POPLA code was issued. Additionally, the letter suggests appealing the charge through IAS (theias.org). The reply letter now stated at the bottom right of the screen that Smart Parking is IPC Accredited Operator rather than BPA Approved Operator as it was in the original NTK letter. I also couldn't find Smart Parking on the Checking the list of BPA Approved Operators for this month (https://www.britishparking.co.uk/BPA-Approved-Operators), even though when checked previously the company was present on the list. Looking forward to hearing your thoughts. Thank you!

Logged
Re: Smart Parking PCN – No Payment – Hotel/Restaurant Car Park
« Reply #11 on: »
It’s interesting- to me - that Smart has abandoned the BPA.

Given that their recent history has been one of telling fibs about their compliance with PoFA, they’re probably now fed up of having their lies undone by POPLA, and hope that the IAS will not do the same given that they only uphold 4% of appeals.

It might be more of a pain for you, but ultimately they don’t have a chance in court, so you could still appeal to the IAS if you can be bothered to see what happens, and if they don’t agree with you just wait for Smart to take you to court and lose.
Logged
Re: Smart Parking PCN – No Payment – Hotel/Restaurant Car Park
« Reply #12 on: »
Frankly if I were an unscrupulous parking firm I'd use the IPC - you can essentially do what you like and still have nearly all your charges upheld at the IAS.

As above. The IAS are largely useless. The very small number of successful appeals I've seen have been on 'longer than 14 day' cases like yours, so it could be worth a roll of the dice, as long as you go into it knowing you've very little chance of success with the IAS (but a much stronger chance of success at court).
Logged
Re: Smart Parking PCN – No Payment – Hotel/Restaurant Car Park
« Reply #13 on: »
The right to a POPLA hearing must be honoured. (not so) Smart Parking was bound by the BPA Code of Practice at the time the NtK was issued.

The NtK forms part of the consumer contract. It creates a legitimate expectation of an appeal route via POPLA. Withholding the stated appeal route could be seen as:

• A misrepresentation under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPRs).
• A breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (failure to act fairly or in accordance with agreed terms).
• Unfair practice under Schedule 1 of the CPRs if it causes detriment to the consumer's ability to contest the charge.

Should this ever reach a court hearing (highly unlikely),a judge may find that the operator’s failure to honour the BPA appeals process is procedurally unfair and unreasonable. This would likely support a finding of unreasonable behaviour if litigation is pursued (especially under CPR 27.14(2)(g)), forming a basis for a costs application.

I need to do a bit more research on this situation.
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Re: Smart Parking PCN – No Payment – Hotel/Restaurant Car Park
« Reply #14 on: »
Quote
I need to do a bit more research on this situation
Happy to lend a hand with that. Off the top of my head I can't think of any examples where a company has jumped ship between an appeal being made and the operator responding!
Logged
Like Like x 1 View List
Pages: [1] 2
« previous next »
  3. Smart Parking PCN – No Payment – Hotel/Restaurant Car Park