Smart Parking Birchwood Centre

Kayaker

I have received an NTK from Smart Parking and would like to know what the latest experience/thinking is regarding:
1. Short vs. long appeal letter (no point writing loads if they're going to reject anyway)
2. Mentioning GPEOL in light of Bevis case.


Many thanks in advance!

Umkomaas

The NEWBIES FAQ sticky still remains the way forward. PE -v- Beavis is on its way to the Supreme Court, so no clear cut determination as yet. Until then, forum advice is not much changed, although GPEOL at this stage may not be as silvery a bullet as before, but there's plenty of other stuff to go at such as:

1. Signage
2. No Contract with landowner to pursue charges in their own name at court
3. No proprietary interest in the land
4. Unlawful Penalty Charge
5. ANPR Accuracy (where appropriate).

But don't forget that the Beavis case was of a rather different nature to other run-of-the-mill PCNs, and GPEOL may still work - don't discount it!

atilla

Just had popla wins on a handful of cases with Smart Parking. All submitted well before the CoA decision.
Smart didn't even bother submitting their case/evidence.

Make of that what you will,

Kayaker

Presumably you're referring to Popla appeals?

atilla

Kayaker wrote: »

Presumably you're referring to Popla appeals?

Yes, since the turn of the year they seem to now want to chance their arm themselves at Popla, No big deal, but they constantly fail to submit their own evidence.
No doubt basing their thinking on most people will fold at that point and pay up anyway.

So, just follow the advice in the sticky etc.

Kayaker

I have a couple of questions on the template appeal letter in the newbies thread.


1. Point 3 states that "the predominant purpose of your business model is to deter". This sentence seems to be incomplete - deter what?


2. Any particular reason for giving them 35 days for a response?