Smart Parking fine £40 for parking in ASDA

ManxRed

I won't lie, anyone can instigate a legal claim against anyone else if they feel like it.

The important thing here though is that - in my opinion of course - Smart Parking would be bloody stupid to try, their case is non-existent and they would get laughed out of court within 5 mins I suspect. We've not heard of them ever trying court before.

Stroma

Kelly companies do try it on at court, and we would be remiss in our advice to you if we said that 100% there will be no action. But on this look at the statistics below on this

2011
1.8m fake tickets issued
600k+ fake tickets were not paid
845 small claims issued
49 went before a judge
25 were won for the motorists
24 were won by the parking companies (mostly undefended )

But out of all those claims not one were by this company
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4070423

Kelly_McNamee

OK Ignoring it then with a letter of complaint to ASDA.

Thank you everyone for your advice and comments

hoohoo

Reading between the lines, you entered the car park twice, and they charged you for overstaying the time, because their ANPR system did not detect you leaving in between. If this is correct, and there are no 'regulations' stating 'do not return before xx hours' then I think in this case appealing is better than ignoring. This is because you did not break the terms and condition of parking and it is only their defective ANPR causing this problem. This will bring the letter chain to a close in the shortest possible time with minimal effort on your part.

Dear xxx

I wish to invoke your appeal process for your invoice yyyy.

I was not parked between the times stated; I left and returned.

I require you to either cancel your invoice or issue me a POPLA code.

I will not be entering into further correspondence with you. Should you not accept my appeal I will require you to produce your entire ANPR records for the period in question and contracts for POPLA in the name of the company detailed on the car park signage, showing that you have sufficient interest in the car park to form contracts with drivers.


Oh, and keep your receipts!

Stroma

hoohoo wrote: »

Reading between the lines, you entered the car park twice, and they charged you for overstaying the time, because their ANPR system did not detect you leaving in between. If this is correct, and there are no 'regulations' stating 'do not return before xx hours' then I think in this case appealing is better than ignoring. This is because you did not break the terms and condition of parking and it is only their defective ANPR causing this problem. This will bring the letter chain to a close in the shortest possible time with minimal effort on your part.

Dear xxx

I wish to invoke your appeal process for your invoice yyyy.

I was not parked between the times stated; I left and returned.

I require you to either cancel your invoice or issue me a POPLA code.

I will not be entering into further correspondence with you. Should you not accept my appeal I will require you to produce your entire ANPR records for the period in question and contracts for POPLA in the name of the company detailed on the car park signage, showing that you have sufficient interest in the car park to form contracts with drivers.


Oh, and keep your receipts!

I would add on that

"As I left the car park your ANPR system must be faulty, and needs repairing or serviced"

That adds weight to the appeal and requires them to investigate, if they don't it means it adds doubt on whether this is a legitimate charge. We of course know its not but if it goes to popla it helps

Coupon-mad

And add a paragraph demanding to know why ASDA are allowing this fly-by-night Australian profit-making firm to rely on signs saying 'TCP' and yet suddenly allege that money is owed to a completely different company, 'Smart'. Demand to know if the new company 'Smart' - who were recently banned by the DVLA for a period of time due to the name change irregularities, even have a contract with ASDA at all - if not then why is this protection racket being allowed to continue, victimising genuine paying customers?

Ask how exactly do ASDA think that extortionate fake 'fines' (because they are not real parking tickets at all) being sent to their customers is a good idea for customer retention?! Then if a customer is not stupid enough to pay the fake PCN they then get a barrage of threats from debt collectors for months afterwards to remind them of that terrible visit to ASDA. Ask if ASDA even know about the wording in the threatograms that follow these fake PCNs, if not then why not because it's actually harassment- a criminal offence - and ASDA are liable because Smart (aka TCP) are their agents.

Add that the very least you expect is to be told the pathetic fake PCN is 'cancelled' but in fact you want to know what ASDA is going to do about this in the long term because the situation is a complete farce in a customer service environment.

Say it is well known on various online forums that there is no such thing as ANY private firm that has ANYTHING to offer a retailer as regards 'parking management'. BPA member or not, they are all simply in it for the money because the fake PCNs are their only form of income. So it's in these firms' interests to issue lots and lots of fake PCNs and not to cancel them - the complete opposite of the rubbish spiel you suspect ASDA Head Office must have swallowed hook, line and sinker when this 'business model' for 'parking management' {LOL!!!} was pitched to them in true joke 'Apprentice' fashion.

ASDA need to wake up to this protection racket before it hits the national papers and before they start being sued for harassment by customers.

Have a read of these threads:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=75552

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=76929&st=0&p=789381

If it were me I would actually also send a 'legal challenge' worded letter to Smart, like the versions discussed in this pepipoo thread:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=77301

But in your case you can add that this was two separate visits, so the fake PCN is even more worthless than usual and you'll be happy to put it before POPLA with your proof of 2 separate visits (don't let Smart have that proof though!).

I just think ignoring the PPC isn't the best advice, I think attack is the best form of defence against this scam.

27col

They don't actually have an ANPR system. What they have is a camera that photographs cars, there is a considerable difference. An ANPR camera system is something operated by the police and it is connected to the dvla database. Which can then reveal the RK of the vehicle and any markers associated with it.
People mistakenly think that the cameras operated by PCC's are in some way similar. They are not, all they are is a camera that photographs a no. plate and notes the time. (Incorrectly, if the posts on here are to be believed.)
If they were proper ANPR cameras, the PPC's would not have to apply to find out the RK details, which they then use to put onto their spurious invoices.

Kite2010

They use a CCTV camera system which scans the number plates of people entering and leaving the car-park, logging it onto a database and highlighting any "long stayers" or "non-payers"

However the system they use is on a computer designed to run Windows 95 but somehow running Windows ME so it crashes

Kelly_McNamee

hoohoo wrote: »

Reading between the lines, you entered the car park twice, and they charged you for overstaying the time, because their ANPR system did not detect you leaving in between. If this is correct, and there are no 'regulations' stating 'do not return before xx hours' then I think in this case appealing is better than ignoring. This is because you did not break the terms and condition of parking and it is only their defective ANPR causing this problem. This will bring the letter chain to a close in the shortest possible time with minimal effort on your part.

Dear xxx

I wish to invoke your appeal process for your invoice yyyy.

I was not parked between the times stated; I left and returned.

I require you to either cancel your invoice or issue me a POPLA code.

I will not be entering into further correspondence with you. Should you not accept my appeal I will require you to produce your entire ANPR records for the period in question and contracts for POPLA in the name of the company detailed on the car park signage, showing that you have sufficient interest in the car park to form contracts with drivers.


Oh, and keep your receipts!

I didn't exit the main entrance I was on my way out of the car park and decided to just get my food shop while in town so about turned and parked my car again in a different parking spot. I have both receipts for my purchases that day. I'm just going to ignore it but am complaining to ASDA regards this.

atilla

27col wrote: »

They don't actually have an ANPR system. What they have is a camera that photographs cars, there is a considerable difference. An ANPR camera system is something operated by the police and it is connected to the dvla database. Which can then reveal the RK of the vehicle and any markers associated with it.
People mistakenly think that the cameras operated by PCC's are in some way similar. They are not, all they are is a camera that photographs a no. plate and notes the time. ( Incorrectly, if the posts on here are to be believed.)
If they were proper ANPR cameras, the PPC's would not have to apply to find out the RK details, which they then use to put onto their spurious invoices.

I'm afraid you're wrong there.
They do have proper anpr. Your description is akin to big brother.
Asda even have anpr at head office. And yes I do know that to be true