Astle Retail Park West Brom PCN

Stefano123

Hi

I've read the Newbies thread but felt my 'story' was not dealt with after a thorough search of the forum.

I have recently moved to a new area and have joined a gym there. A colleague at my place of work had (wrongly) advised me that 'gym members are afforded free parking’. Hence, the driver of the vehicle used the parking facilities without paying to park the vehicle. The driver did not see any obvious signs telling them otherwise and they also report that no barrier system is in operation to prevent honest mistakes happening.

The driver genuinely didn't mean to cheat the system and seemingly was guilty of trusting someone else's advice.

I note, after reading the forum, the PCN must be issued within 14 days of the alleged contravention. I only received a PCN, however, after 22 days.

Thanks for your time in advance.

KeithP

Stefano123 wrote: »

I've read the Newbies thread but felt my 'story' was not dealt with after a thorough search of the forum.

A thorough search eh?

This thread will boost your confidence:

forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5686020

Stefano123

Thanks for avoiding the temptation to be patronising.

KeithP

The PCN only needs to have been received within fourteen days if the operator intends to rely on POFA 2012 to transfer liability to the registered keeper.

If the do not want to do that, then they have to be sure the person they're chasing is the driver.

It is important that you do not disclose who the driver is.

To that end, you would be wise to edit your original post to remove clue to the driver's identity.
For example, the third sentence of your second paragraph should perhaps look something like:

Hence, during my first week using the gym the driver used the parking facilities without paying to park the vehicle.

I hope in the email you have already sent to Smart you have not already given away the identity of the driver.

KeithP

Of course I should've said 'review the rest of your opening post for similar improvements'.

Was it the driver who didn't see any signs?

Please don't think this is pedantry.
The parking companies trawl forums like this looking for people to trip themselves up.

Stefano123

From reading previous threads, I'm aware that it is important not to disclose the identity of the driver. My next move is to appeal directly to Smart Parking using the text stated in the 'newbie thread' and wait for, what I presume will be, an inevitable rejection of my appeal.

If it will be of interest or of use to current and future forum members, I will keep this thread updated.

Redx

yes , use the blue text template "as is" and keep us updated

if they issue a popla code, use post #3 to draft a suitable popla appeal

strictly speaking , nobody here cares about the backstory as its usually irrelevant to any successful appeal

Stefano123

The email was sent 'without prejudice' and was not sent as a formal declaration or confirmation of the driver's identity. It was a genuine attempt to resolve the driver's honest mistake. The formal appeal is the first official correspondence between the two parties.

KeithP

Stefano123 wrote: »

The email was sent 'without prejudice' and was not sent as a formal declaration or confirmation of the driver's identity.

You're kidding, aren't you?

If you implied who the driver was, as discussed earlier, what do you think 'without prejudice' means to these sc@mmers?

"formal declaration or confirmation" - eh?
A mere hint is good enough.

Stefano123

No, I'm not kidding.

I appreciate the advice, thanks.

Coupon-mad

Please don't add 'without prejudice' the the template. Send it again!

If it was meant to have those words, it would.

Also - are Smart cases appealed by email, I thought they had an online appeals page. Use it.