Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hi,

We are a supported living holiday company, back in March 25 one of our vehicles was dropping off a disabled client and used a private car park to the rear of their premises. The vehicle was there for 6mins. The signage at the entrance, which is in effect a tunnel underneath some shops, is very poor. The vehicle approached from the right. There is no signage on the wall that is view as per the document.

SMART Parking have been served this notification of legal action against them, which looks at a breach under the 2010 Equality Act and also obtaining money by false pretences, namely the PCN was paid based upon a false statement declaring the signage was correct and compiled with the BPA guidance.

SMART Parking have requested the driver's permission to now investigate the incident. It has been pointed out to them that their 'contract' is with the registered keeper and not the driver. They sent the PCN to the registered keeper and they did not uphold an appeal submitted by the registered keeper, so why do they need to know who the driver was?

I'm sure I read on your site that you should not declare who the driver was at the time of the alleged offence, does that advice apply under these circumstances where the PCN has already been paid by the registered keeper, albeit under duress?

Many thanks in advance.

 

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

I have to agree with the above observation. I am sorry if it sounds a bit harsh but here are the reasons why you are flogging a dead horse:

Is this worth pursuing in county court?

Bluntly: No, not really. Here’s why:

The Keeper paid the PCN. That’s the fatal flaw. Once you pay, you’re essentially accepting liability. Courts will ask: If you knew it was wrong, why did you pay? Saying it was “under duress” won’t fly unless there was serious coercion—which there wasn’t. A threat of POPLA costs or escalation isn’t duress in legal terms.

You had a winning hand and folded. Smart Parking almost never complies with PoFA. If you’d held your ground and gone to POPLA, you’d likely have won. But by paying, you gave up your leverage. You’re now trying to claw back money you voluntarily handed over.

Civil court isn’t the place for moral victories. You can’t use county court to get a judge to declare Smart Parking’s practices unlawful or criminal. The court will only look at whether you’re owed money. And since you paid without being forced, the answer is probably no.

The Equality Act angle is weak post-payment. Yes, unloading a disabled person might give you protection. But again, you didn’t use that argument when it mattered—during the appeal. Courts won’t reward hindsight.

So what now?

Learn from it. Next time, don’t pay. Challenge the PCN, cite PoFA non-compliance, and go to POPLA if needed. Educate others. Use this as a case study in how not to handle a PCN.

Don’t waste more time or money. Filing a claim now is likely to be dismissed, and you’ll be out the court fee too.

As far as legal action goes—this one’s dead in the water.

Thanks for the reply regarding notifying who the driver was to SMART Parking, I couldn't see the issue once the PCN has been paid, but I felt it wise to ask based upon previous posts on that specific subject.

Moral crusade, yes slightly.......I try and do a very professional job in relation to ensuring the duty of care to our  disabled clients is met. Upon reflection, there were no other safe options to ensure this was achieved.

I have fought all my life for my disabled brother's rights who recently passed away. My thoughts on this incident is how can they get away with this, its shocking behaviour but an indictment of 2025. The answer is, they can't as its gone way beyond a mere PCN.

Thank you for your time and comments. I did received a random DM which appeared to be from the site, but your helpful comments do contradict that message so I can only presume that it was sent to me in error.

So in summary, crack on without fear or favour and good luck!!!!