Smart Parking Again!

Coupon-mad

Chappy1990 wrote: »

Thing is I have no idea which rules they have broken?
The ticket says Smart Parking LTD, the letter just says Smart Parking.

If they say I was parked outside of the lines and they don't have photos it's my words against them? What happens if I ignore it?

Stop thinking about 'what happened' because it won't be decided on the lines! Why the heck anyone would suddenly want to bury their head in the sand and ignore the very stage where they WILL WIN the appeal at Smart's own expense is beyond me.

Yes you do know when you put your mind to it, whether they may have broken rules, and you don't have to prove each point, you can just say it! Look at the example POPLA appeals on the linked thread, they are long appeals but they aren't rocket science, come on you can't have it much easier than being given the wording to copy & paste!

e.g. a paragraph in most appeals says they haven't identified the 'creditor' in a PCN. So you just look at your fake PCN and if they haven't said 'the creditor is' then you can use that paragraph, obviously.

etc...same with all the paragraphs, look at them and think 'can I use this?' and in most cases, YES you can. You can use MOST paragraphs you will find of course, it's not up to you to prove your (copied and pasted from other POPLA appeals) points. It is up to Smart to rebut them and they won't be able to.

Chappy1990

Is this any good?

Dear Sir/Madam,

APPEAL RE: PCN

On 17/05/13 I parked my vehicle outside of the shop I work at. I was displaying my staff permit visibly in the vehicles front windscreen. I was then given a PCN for 'Obstructive Parking' and a further letter stating that my appeal with them was denied and that I was not 'Correctly parked within the lines of a designated parking bay'.

I challenged this notice on a number of issues. (Please see appendix 2 for copy of my challenge). On the 18/06/13 I received a rejection with regards to the alleged contravention which included the POPLA verification code and also extending their 'discount' period.
I would like to appeal this notice on the following grounds.


1. Inadequate Signage
2. No Contract was Knowingly Entered and No Losses Have Been Demonstrated
3. Punitive/ Unfair/ Unreasonable Charge
4. Grace Period

1. Inadequate Signage.

Attached is a photograph of the car parking signs (which are all the same around the park) to which is states absolutely nothing regarding staff parking. I was verbally told by the centre staff that 'staff parking is behind Pizza Hut' and no agreement and contract has been seen or signed. I questioned why the signs have no information regarding permit holder/staff parking and was told that it was a Land Owner run scheme and that it doesn't have to be sign posted. I'd also like to state that I pay £30 a month to park in the car park via standing order. Again, no terms and conditions or contract have been seen or signed.
With regards to BPA Operational Requirements Section 18.3 operators ‘must place signs containing the specific parking terms THROUGHOUT the site, so that drivers are given the chance to read them at the time of parking or leaving their vehicle’. As you can see in the pictures there is nothing regarding staff parking ANYWHERE on the site.
BPA Code of Practice Operational Requirements Section 18.1 ‘In all cases, the driver’s use of your land will be governed by your terms and conditions, which the driver should be made aware of from the start. You must use signs to make it easy for them to find out what your terms and conditions are’. Again, no statement of their terms and conditions for staff parking.
My appeal is that I wasn't made aware of any Terms and Conditions on the site for staff parking permits and that the vehicle was NOT parked in an obstructive way.

This brings me onto my next point;

2.No Contract was Knowingly Entered and No Losses Have Been Demonstrated

There was no contract between the driver and Smart Parking LTD. I did not see any contractual information on any signs, due to different company names, when driving on the road and therefore at that time had no idea that any contract or restrictions applied. Once stopped there was insufficient signage in the vicinity. As a consequence the requirements for forming a contract such as a meeting of minds, agreement, and certainty of terms were not satisfied as I have proved with my photographic evidence.

As there was no contract, then at most I was guilty of a civil trespass. If this were the case, I may be liable to damages. Given that no ‘damage’ was done to the road and that the road was not blocked when the driver stopped or when the driver left, there was in fact no loss at all.
At the time, the car park was very much empty so I asked St.Marks retail park who are the agents for Smart Parking LTD or Town & City Parking LTD about the losses they have incurred to which they denied to comment. I argue that the parking charge does not reflect the operator’s loss, and so is not enforceable.

3. Fairness of Contract

The following matters are relevant:

The charge Town & City Parking LTD are imposing is punitive and therefore void (i.e. unenforceable). The £80 charge is arbitrary and disproportionate to any alleged breach of contract or trespass.

The £80 charge Town & City Parking LTD are imposing is an unfair term (and therefore not binding) under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. In particular, Schedule 2 of those Regulations which gives an indicative (and non-exhaustive) list of terms which may be regarded as unfair and includes at Schedule 2(1)(e):

‘Terms which have the object or effect of requiring any consumer who fails to fulfil his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation.’

Furthermore, Regulation 5(1) says:

‘A contractual term which has not been individually negotiated shall be regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer’

And 5(2), which states:

‘A term shall always be regarded as not having been individually negotiated where it has been drafted in advance and the consumer has therefore not been able to influence the substance of the term.’

The £80 charge Town & City Parking LTD are imposing is an unreasonable indemnity clause under section 4(1) of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977, which says:

‘A person cannot by reference to any contract term be made to indemnify another person (whether a party to the contract or not) in respect of liability that may be incurred by the other for negligence or breach of contract, except in so far as the contract term satisfies the requirement of reasonableness.’

St. Marks Retail park allows staff to pay £30 a month via standing order and to park for an hour is only £1.50 so therefore the parking charges issued are deemed as Unfair.

5. Grace Period

BPA General Conditions in the UK Section 13.2 ‘You should allow the driver a reasonable grace period in which to decide if they are going to stay or go. If the driver is on your land without permission you should still allow them a grace period to read your signs and leave before you take enforcement action’. As in my case I parked, unloaded stock from my vehicle to which I took to the warehouse at the rear of the store. By that time the car had already left in less than 5 minutes. How long is a grace period? Why has no such grace period been applied in my case as I wasn't even parked 10 minutes before receiving the PCN? I argue that there is no information on the signs regarding loading/unloading and no information regarding the grace period.

I'd also like to point out, see attached, that the signs around the park state that the operator is Town and & City Parking LTD, now there is no such Limited company listed on the BPA website and therefore I conclude Town & City Parking LTD have secured my details from the DVLA under false pretences as a different alias and this is now in breach of the Data Protection Act 1998

In conclusion I would like you to uphold this appeal based on the points I have raised above and the evidence I have presented. Also please bear in mind the difficulties I have had in constructing this appeal due to requested information being withheld by Town & City Parking.


I look forward to your outcome in this matter.

kirkbyinfurnesslad_2

Thats far to long winded, send me an email to info@popla.me.uk and ill sort a much more concise appeal for you

Umkomaas

kirkbyinfurnesslad wrote: »

Thats far to long winded, send me an email to info@popla.me.uk and ill sort a much more concise appeal for you

OP - take up kirkbyinfurnesslad' kind offer. He is well experienced in all of this and can be absolutely trusted.

One point mentioned to you previously - Identification of Creditor. Did your NtK have this detailed? If not an important point for bringing up with POPLA.

Kirkby.....lad will sort it.

Chappy1990

Hey guys,

I've already submitted that albeit I shortened it slightly, if Kirkby does another one, can I submit it again?

Also, I've requested photos of my car with the ticket on the windscreen but they say I can't have them? Why not? And can I legally obtain them?

kirkbyinfurnesslad_2

No as you have done it, dont waste your time doing another

Chappy1990

I have requested the photo evidence from the manager of the retail park but she now says I'm being rude and won't supply me the photos, is there any law saying they can't provide the photos for me?

kirkbyinfurnesslad_2

you are taking Smart Parking to seriously

You have done the appeal,just forget about it now

Chappy1990

I'm taking the retail park to seriously, I hate them and their staff for various reasons, I just wanted the photos to prove I was in the right

Parking-Prankster

Chappy1990 wrote: »

I'm taking the retail park to seriously, I hate them and their staff for various reasons, I just wanted the photos to prove I was in the right

Hi Chappy,

I have 3 POPLA appeals in with Smart Parking at the moment, all just testing out that the car park owner does not have a contract with 'Smart Parking Ltd'

I can honestly say that Smart Parking's evidence packs are the worst I have seen so far, even worse than Highview.

Therefore please do not stress; your appeal contains more than enough points to win, and when my cases are adjudicated I will publish the decision so you can check you have included the same points as me.

If not, you can always add to POPLA appeals at any time.

My appeal was filed one month ago; my best guess is that I have a month and half to wait still, and you have four months, but that may change if POPLA hire more staff.