Smart parking

Edna_Basher

Seamonkey65 wrote: »

they just refer to 'waterworld' .... do they have to state specifically?

Paragraph 9 (2) (a) of Schedule 4 of POFA states that a Notice to Keeper must specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates. I think it is reasonable to argue that the term “Waterworld” does not adequately specify the relevant land.

However, you can save this sort of detail for your appeal to POPLA when the time comes.

For now, just get a “soft appeal” into Smart before you go away (appeal as the vehicle’s keeper, giving no clues as to the identity of the driver). As atilla says, there’ll still be enough time to sort your POPLA appeal when you get back.

Fruitcake

Seamonkey65 wrote: »

Thanks guys. So if we appeal but end up losing would we be liable for the initial discounted amount or the full
Amount?

There is a Facebook page but they keep deleting comments about parking!
They are responding to trip advisor reviews but only to say that their parking charges are reasonable, but they are missing the point slightly. I don't think anyone is arguing that £2-3 is unreasonable for parking, but if you add on a £60 pcn it definitely is!

If you appeal to the PPC and lose, you then appeal to PoPLA where you will get the 100% MSE discount. Ignore the reduced price offered by the PPC, it's their desperate attempt to scare you into paying something to which they are not entitled, and to save them the 27 quid plus VaT it will cost them to lose at PoPLA.


Send the template appeal exactly as it is and enjoy your holiday. Come back here to tell us about the fun and games when you get back. You can tell us about your holiday as well if you want.

hoohoo

Smart Parking's NTK are not compliant (and the 'Waterworld' error is just one point) so you must appeal as keeper and give no hint who was driving. Double and treble check any appeal.

Then when they reject just appeal to POPLA stating the NTK is not compliant and so keeper liability does not apply.

Job done

Seamonkey65

I just send the template letter as is and save any finer points about the keeper believing the parking was overpaid rather than underpaid and the specifics of not complying with para 9 to the popla appeal?
Thanks for all your help so far. Will let you know how we get on!

Guys_Dad

If you are going to use the non-compliant NtK, then you are depending upon the assessor finding out why it is non-compliant. If you get a senior assessor, then you will probably be ok, but if you get a less experienced one, then they might not see why it is non-compliant.

You should highlight where it is non-compliant yourself and not just say that it isn't hoping someone else will do your job for you, so to speak.

Seamonkey65

Hi, just to update, we had a cancellation of our pcn from smart parking two days ago on the back of our appeal to them. result!
Thanks for everyone's help and advice

atilla

Seamonkey65 wrote: »

Hi, just to update, we had a cancellation of our pcn from smart parking two days ago on the back of our appeal to them. result!
Thanks for everyone's help and advice

Nice one. They really don't like a fight this lot. Low hanging fruit is their target audience.

MISC

Hi all,

I got a £100 fine from smart parking for not entering my registration details correctly. I appealed decision with them stating that there was an issue with their machine. No surprise that Smart Parking basically said tuff and that I had to pay. I appealed there decision and went to POPLA - to my surprise they declined my appeal and said I had to pay the £100.

What I did straight away was email waterworld themselves and complained and said I will never come back to their establishment unless the cancel the fine. 24 hours later I get a email from smart parking saying they have cancelled their £100 fine.

Basically it seems that if you complain to the land owners as opposed to SMART parking or POPLA you get somewhere.

Hope this helps guys

Umkomaas

Good result - in the end. I don't know what your POPLA appeal said, but if it was principally about the machine not working, you were on a bit of a loser.

I just wonder, for completeness, if you wouldn't mind showing us a copy of your POPLA appeal (and their response in rejecting it), so that we can show other posters exactly what doesn't win at POPLA, and why - it would be a great resource.

Perhaps start a new thread, copying and pasting your post above into it as an intro.

pogofish

MISC wrote: »

Hi all,

I got a £100 fine from smart parking for not entering my registration details correctly. I appealed decision with them stating that there was an issue with their machine. No surprise that Smart Parking basically said tuff and that I had to pay. I appealed there decision and went to POPLA - to my surprise they declined my appeal and said I had to pay the £100.

What I did straight away was email waterworld themselves and complained and said I will never come back to their establishment unless the cancel the fine. 24 hours later I get a email from smart parking saying they have cancelled their £100 fine.

Basically it seems that if you complain to the land owners as opposed to SMART parking or POPLA you get somewhere.

Hope this helps guys

Is this the OP's ticket or someone else's?