Scotland / Leased Car / PCN from Smart Parking

finderskeepers1

Hi Folks,

I have received 2 PCN from Smart Parking Ltd each for allegedly the driver of the car I'm registered keeper of being slightly over the time.

The car in question is hired via my own small business and as the keeper of the vehicle recieved the 2 charge notices to the registered address.

Is it simply a case of appealing with the following and is there anything else that should be considered such as timing of when to actually do the appeal?

Many Thanks!

----

I appeal and dispute this ‘parking charge’, as the keeper of the vehicle. I deny any liability.

You are no doubt familiar with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, and that it does not apply in Scotland. Therefore there is no keeper liability whatsoever—you can only pursue the driver, but there will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn.

Given that Smart Parking Ltd has no right to keeper liability in this case, please confirm that you shall now cancel this charge. Alternatively, should you choose to reject my challenge, please provide me with a unique POPLA appeal reference so that I may escalate the matter via the independent adjudication service.

Thank you for your cooperation and I look forward to receiving your response within the relevant timescales specified under the British Parking Association Ltd Code of Practice.

Umkomaas

You are no doubt familiar with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, and that it does not apply in Scotland. Therefore there is no keeper liability whatsoever—you can only pursue the driver, but there will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn.

Some of the above depends on the date of the parking contravention. What date did that occur please?

Fruitcake

If you don't want the scammers to find out who was driving, you shouldn't give the game away on here. Edit your initial post accordingly and only ever refer to The Driver and The Keeper.
Parking scammers read this forum.

As above, if the alleged event occurred before the 15th of November, then there is no keeper liability.
After that date, a keeper can be held liable.

The most important thing is to ensure the lease company are instructed not to pay these charges on your behalf, nor charge you for doing it.

If you are the registered keeper then you can ignore. If the lease company is the registered keeper then you need to tell the scammers you are the hirer/lessee.
There is a letter by edna basher in the NEWBIES you can modify for this situation.

finderskeepers1

Thanks for the responses.

I am a bit confused, I haven't named myself in the post and it's an anonymous account, how could this be used against me?

I'm not sure what part I should change to get myself out of danger?

Please let me know and I'll do it right away, and thanks for the warning.

There were two separate incidents actually, one was before the 15th the other after.
I am the registered keeper.

Redx

Dates and times and any other info could mean the PPC can ascertain who you are , we have seen it before , so no "My , Me , Myself & I" , those are the words you replace

Use ambiguous terms like Driver and Keeper , because only those 2 definitions are required

In other words , just do what we advise you to do , don't second guess the motives , regulars here who reply know what they are talking about

If you had a knock on your car , asked advice on a motoring forum and were advised not to drive it , the important thing is not to drive it , not ask why and continue to drive it , you alter your behaviour

Fruitcake

finderskeepers1 wrote: »

Thanks for the responses.

I am a bit confused, I haven't named myself in the post and it's an anonymous account, how could this be used against me?

I'm not sure what part I should change to get myself out of danger?

Please let me know and I'll do it right away, and thanks for the warning.

There were two separate incidents actually, one was on the 12th Nov and the other 15th.

I am the registered keeper.

Paragraph 2 of your first post gives information about the identity of the driver.
Any other information posted about the dates of the event/NTK, the location, precise times of ANPR scameras etcetera will identify a poster as the keeper.
Saying things like, "I parked" or "I drove", or "I frequent …" etcetera will identify the poster as the driver as the keeper. The scammers now know the identity of the driver from information posted on here.

Just because you don't understand the information you have been given doesn't mean you shouldn't follow the advice.

Parking scammers have used information from this forum against a motorist at the appeal stage and in court.

Only ever refer to The Driver and The Keeper, who are two different people.

Umkomaas

There were two separate incidents actually, one was on the 12th Nov and the other 15th.

The one on 12th Nov, only the driver is responsible for that, but the one on the 15th Nov (the day that Royal Assent was given to the Transport (Scotland) Act 2019) brings keeper liability possibly into play, although not under PoFA.

But this is as new to us as it is to you and we will learn how to deal with post-15/11 PCNs as they start to surface. Nobody is yet geared up for the ramifications, so you need to keep a close eye on developments on the forum and tell us on this thread of any further movement in your cases.

Incidentally, are both PCNs from Smart Parking identical in wording (obviously the date/times etc of the parking events will be different)?

Do they include anything about keeper liability?

Is there any mention of PoFA in them?

finderskeepers1

Thanks for clarification on exposing myself legally, i have fixed it now I think.

So what's my move here?

I'm fairly sure the lease company hasn't been instructed to pay as the letters came straight to me asking me to pay, should I contact my lease company?

What if I am correct, should I just ignore?

Or do I send the template above for the pre 15th letter and do something else with the other?

As a newbie to this, it all seems fairly complicated and like it might take some effort.

Thanks again for all the advice.

finderskeepers1

The text was the same on both letters, here's the main body of what they said

Edit: damn, uploaded the image to imgbb so I could post the letter here but unfortunately, I can't post the image as I'm a newbie here.

The gist of it was: Smart Parking Ltd have the right to seek payment of the parking charge for unauthorised parking of the vehicle on the land on the relevant date as owner of the land a contractual right to occupy or to have possession of the land, or acting as agent of the landowner.

Clearly displayed signage states that it's private land managed by smart parking, ltd.

By either not purchasing the appropriate parkign time or by remaining in the car park for longer than permitted in accordance with the terms and conditions set out in the signang, the parking charge is now payable to smart parking.

£100 reduced to £60 for payment within 2 weeks.

Following the landmark Supreme Court ruling of Parking Eye v Beavis, it has now been established that a parking charge notice issued on private land is enforcable. The court rejected claims that such charges are extravagant, exorbitant or unconcionable, and advised that such charges act a necessary deterent for breach of contract. A full copy of the supreme court judgement can be found online at (supreme court link)

If you feel you have sufficient grounds to appeal this claim... yada yada yada...

DoaM

Drop any http and www bits, and maybe put a space after imgbb ... then you'll be able to post a link. Someone here will make it a working link.

Make sure any personal details are redacted before you post the link.

finderskeepers1

Cool, will remember for future but I've covered it in the typed version above. Cheers.