Smartparking overstay (Match day)

ciaranM

Good evening,
Sorry that i have had to make a new thread for this one but i have gone through the process in the Newbie thread totally wrong and i am now wondering how i should proceed.
In short i got a fine for an overstay at my gym car park (Kilner way, xcercise4less) through the post, i panicked and quickly appealed the fine through the smartparking appeal service on the website, where i used the term i repeatedly i.e. i was in the gym etc so basically saying i was driving the vehicle. The appeal was declined and i was given the POPLA info to start an appeal which i rushed to do, not very well i admit although i referred to being the registered keeper of the vehicle, i am now at the evidence stage to add my own comments, since then i found this forum which i now know i have done everything wrong, since finding this forum i followed the advice of complaining to the retailer (xcercise4less) the manager emailed smartparking to get the fine withdrawn but smartparking replied with the POPLA appeal process has already begun and they cant now withdraw the fine or overturn the POPLA decision, so my question is what route do i take now? do i carry on with the POPLA or further push the gym to try and get it withdrawn? i am just now worried that my POPLA appeal will be rejected.
cheers

waamo

Ask the gym for confirmation that they do not want this to proceed to court. If they are the ones who signed the contract it makes life very difficult for Smart to take you to court.

Assuming the gym are the principal then Smart have to follow their instructions. A judge would not be impressed if Smart ignored their employers instructions.

Other than that all you can do is wait for the POPLA decision.

ciaranM

Its a retail park with a few different shops so not quite sure who actually owns the car park i will try if it gets to that stage though hopefully it does not.
I have submitted my comments on the evidence, so see what happens from here
cheers

Coupon-mad

You will lose, so then you will have to ignore Smart unless they try court later. Keep ALL letters and the POPLA evidence file they submitted (save a copy).

What a shame. Dead easy to beat with one email, usually, either at first appeal as keeper, or by complaining first. Either would have worked.

Never mind, no-one pays Smart, so who cares really!

ciaranM

Thanks for the response, so when I lose I just continue to not pay, and save all letters from smart parking / debt collection.
Will not paying now have any affect on my credit rating?
Cheers

waamo

ciaranM wrote: »

Thanks for the response, so when I lose I just continue to not pay, and save all letters from smart parking / debt collection.
Will not paying now have any affect on my credit rating?
Cheers

You haven't got any kind of credit with them so they cannot affect your credit score.

DoaM

Your creditworthiness (which is the proper expression) would not be affected by debt collector letters. The only way it can be affected is IF:

a) The PPC raises a court claim AND
b) They win (whether you lose or they get a default judgment) AND
c) You fail to pay the judgment amount in the required time

Only THEN would a judgment be registered that could affect your creditworthiness.

ciaranM

Thank you for all your responses.
just a quick update on this, I finally received the decision from POPLA: unsuccessful
pasted below the response i got:

Decision Unsuccessful
Assessor summary of operator case
The operator has issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) due to exceeding maximum allowed stay.

Assessor summary of your case
The appellant’s case is that there was no signage to indicate that it was a match day when the parking occurred. The appellant states that it took over 30 minutes to exit the car park due to high volumes of traffic. The appellant has raised further grounds of appeal. However, these have only been included in the ‘motorist comments’ section. POPLA cannot consider grounds of appeal that have only been raised in this section and weren’t included within their original appeal to POPLA. The appellant has provided no evidence to support the appeal.

Assessor supporting rational for decision
The appellant appealed as the registered keeper. They have not identified themselves as being the driver of the vehicle on the day of the parking event. As such, I have considered the PCN under the requirements of the Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) 2012. I have reviewed the PCN and I am satisfied it was issued in accordance with the requirements of PoFA 2012. I am therefore satisfied the operator is entitled to pursue the registered keeper for the PCN. The operator has provided photographic evidence of vehicle MC07YSF entering the site at 12:48 and exiting at 14:48 totalling a stay of 2 hours spent at site. When entering onto a private car park such as this one, any motorist forms a contract with the operator by remaining on the land for a reasonable period. The signage in place sets out the terms and conditions of this contract. The operator has provided photographic evidence of the signage in place in the car park, which states: “Maximum stay 3 hours … Maximum stay on match days only 90 minutes … A Parking Charge Notice of £100 will be issued in the following circumstances: Parking over 90 minutes on match days” The appellant explains that there was no signage to indicate that it was a match day when the parking occurred. However, there is no legal or regulatory requirement for operators to notify drivers when it is a match day. Drivers are expected to educate themselves as to when is and isn’t a match day prior to entering the car park. The appellant states that it took over 30 minutes to exit the car park due to high volumes of traffic. However, they have provided no evidence to support their claim. The British Parking Association (BPA) has outlined a Code of Practice that all parking operators are expected to adhere to. Paragraph 13 discusses Grace Periods. The code of practice states: “13.4 You should allow the driver a reasonable period to leave the private car park after the parking contract has ended, before you take enforcement action. If the location is one where parking is normally permitted, the Grace Period at the end of the parking period should be a minimum of 10 minutes.” However, with no supporting evidence I consider an overstay of 30 minutes to be too excessive to be considered under Grace Periods. Ultimately, it is the motorist’s responsibility to comply with the terms and conditions of the car park. Upon consideration of the evidence, the appellant exceeded the maximum allowed stay, and therefore did not comply with the terms and conditions. As such, I conclude that the PCN has been issued correctly. Accordingly, I must refuse this appeal.

Would it be worth contacting the land owner of the retail park to see if they can have the PCN withdrawn as i can prove i was in the gym?
Cheers

The_Deep

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]PoPLA decisions are like the curate's egg. A judge might take a completely different view. Wait to see if they are daft enough to take this to court where, imo, they would struggle. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif] [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Read what Pete Wishart MP said recently in the House of commons about Smart Parking.[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]"I am sick and tired of receiving emails from people complaining about the behaviour of parking companies, telling me that they will never again visit Perth city centre because of the negative experience they had when they had the misfortune to end up in a car park operated by one of these companies. I have received more complaints about one car park in the city of Perth than about any other issue. That car park is operated by the lone ranger of the parking cowboys: the hated and appalling Smart Parking—I see that many other Members are unfortunate enough to have Smart Parking operating in their constituencies. It has reached the stage where one member of my staff now spends a good part of each day just helping my constituents and visitors to my constituency to navigate the appeals process.
…
The BPA does not have the ability to regulate these companies and has shown no sign whatsoever that it is trying to get on top of some of the sharper practices. The BPA gives a veneer of legitimacy to some of the more outlandish rogue operators by including them in their membership, allowing them to continue to operate. The Bill will oblige operators such as Smart Parking to amend their practices." [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Nine times out of ten these tickets are scams, so consider complaining to your MP, it can cause the scammer extra costs and work, and has been known to get the charge cancelled.

Parliament is well aware of the MO of these private parking companies, many of whom are former clampers, and on 15th March 2019 a Bill was enacted to curb the excesses of these shysters. Codes of Practice are being drawn up, an independent appeals service will be set up, and access to the DVLA's date base more rigorously policed, persistent offenders denied access to the DVLA database and unable to operate.

Hopefully life will become impossible for the worst of these scammers, but until this is done you should still complain to your MP, citing the new legislation.

[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/enacted[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]

Just as the clampers were finally closed down, so hopefully will many of these Private Parking Companies.[/FONT][/FONT]

[/FONT]

waamo

Drivers are expected to educate themselves when its a match day? I would have told them I had checked online and there were no England cricket matches that day so it wasn't a match day.

Johno100

The_Deep wrote: »

Read what Pete Wishart MP said recently in the House of commons about Smart Parking.

"I am sick and tired of receiving emails from people complaining about the behaviour of parking companies, telling me that they will never again visit Perth city centre because of the negative experience they had when they had the misfortune to end up in a car park operated by one of these companies. I have received more complaints about one car park in the city of Perth than about any other issue. That car park is operated by the lone ranger of the parking cowboys: the hated and appalling Smart Parking—I see that many other Members are unfortunate enough to have Smart Parking operating in their constituencies. It has reached the stage where one member of my staff now spends a good part of each day just helping my constituents and visitors to my constituency to navigate the appeals process.

Yet his party in Scotland (the SNP) have just legislated to open the same flood gates that were opened in England and Wales in 2012 by the introduction of Keeper Liability. He thinks he's getting a lot of constituent cases coming over his desk now, he hasn't seen anything yet.