Smart Parking hit with CCJ (over £3,300) after 5-year wrongful pursuit – my experience

the_worm_that_turned

Coupon-mad said:

Smart was always non-POFA until this Spring.

What do you mean when you say non-POFA?

Umkomaas

Well done on your success. Great fight back. 

Until around Spring of this year Smart never issued PoFA-compliant NtKs, never made any attempt to do so. Once they left the BPA to join the IPC, we noticed a change in approach and now the Smart NtKs we've seen subsequently are PoFA compliant. 

the_worm_that_turned

Umkomaas said:

Well done on your success. Great fight back. 

Until around Spring of this year Smart never issued PoFA-compliant NtKs, never made any attempt to do so. Once they left the BPA to join the IPC, we noticed a change in approach and now the Smart NtKs we've seen subsequently are PoFA compliant. 

Do we understand why they would think that is a sensible/sound approach when the legislation is very clear?

Coupon-mad

Because they don't have to use the legislation. They can issue non-POFA PCNs and it's easier. No strict deadlines or wording.

the_worm_that_turned

Coupon-mad said:

Because they don't have to use the legislation. They can issue non-POFA PCNs and it's easier. No strict deadlines or wording.

Ah, I see. In which case, if they adopt a non-POFA approach to an alleged parking contravention they can’t make the keeper liable and therefore their only lawful target is the actual driver.

What they can’t do is chase the keeper for years, pretend the keeper has to pay, pass their data around, or keep processing their details especially when they have admitted that the keeper wasn’t the driver. That’s where they run into GDPR issues and possibly harassment.

Attempting to make false claims that a non-liable person made an appeal is also very dodgy tactics.

Coupon-mad

Agreed.

I've seen your pm but am off out to a family event today.

Gr1pr

the_worm_that_turned said:

Car1980 said:

the_worm_that_turned said:

Car1980 said:

Back in 2020 I received a Parking Charge Notice from Smart Parking. I was not the driver, and I told them this immediately. 

Presumably you told them who the driver was?

Why would you presume that? And why would I do that? 

The matter, which ultimately resulted in them owing me £3100 (£2350 for administrative costs and time spent responding in accordance with a fee schedule + £750 damages from stress and anxiety from data sharing and harassment) was strictly between me and Smart Parking.

Who was, or was not the driver is for them to prove. And prove, they did not. It was not me though, as I told them from the very beginning.

Because if the PCN was issued correctly under the Protection of Freedoms Act, the Registered Keeper is legally liable whether or not they were the driver. 

Anybody can sue anybody else for any amount and gain a default judgment if it's ignored.

I don't mean to burst your bubble, but I don't see why "I was not the driver" would succeed if it went to a hearing, which is might well do if they apply to set it aside. The court letter might have simply not arrived.

I didn't mean to sound flippant.

I wasn't the driver. I have never received a POFA compliant NtK from Smart Parking.

However, I didn't want any of that to distract from the FACT that an alleged £170 £100 parking contravention resulted in Smart Parking being ordered to pay me over £3300 via a CCJ for a claim I brought against them for fees owing to me under a Fee Schedule (£2350) and damages for unlawful data processing and harassment (£750). 

Fixed that for you, it was a £100 pcn, the extra spurious £70 was the fictional £70 debt debt collectors fee,  regularly thrown out by the courts and hopefully to be banned next year

Its a regular statement for paragraph 3 in a defence too, plus the latter paragraph arguments in the template 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6574573/dcb-legal-letter-of-claim-parking-outside-the-lines/p3

No private pcn can be more than £100, but creative accounting seems to lead to a single pcn attracting a court claim of between £250 and £350 , unless it's SIP or Parking Eye 

Study the paragraph in the defence template where it's specifically mentioned in the defence these days 

But well done on your win and I hope that they pay the money,  even if it means a high court writ and HCE involvement 

the_worm_that_turned

Gr1pr said:

the_worm_that_turned said:

Car1980 said:

the_worm_that_turned said:

Car1980 said:

Back in 2020 I received a Parking Charge Notice from Smart Parking. I was not the driver, and I told them this immediately. 

Presumably you told them who the driver was?

Why would you presume that? And why would I do that? 

The matter, which ultimately resulted in them owing me £3100 (£2350 for administrative costs and time spent responding in accordance with a fee schedule + £750 damages from stress and anxiety from data sharing and harassment) was strictly between me and Smart Parking.

Who was, or was not the driver is for them to prove. And prove, they did not. It was not me though, as I told them from the very beginning.

Because if the PCN was issued correctly under the Protection of Freedoms Act, the Registered Keeper is legally liable whether or not they were the driver. 

Anybody can sue anybody else for any amount and gain a default judgment if it's ignored.

I don't mean to burst your bubble, but I don't see why "I was not the driver" would succeed if it went to a hearing, which is might well do if they apply to set it aside. The court letter might have simply not arrived.

I didn't mean to sound flippant.

I wasn't the driver. I have never received a POFA compliant NtK from Smart Parking.

However, I didn't want any of that to distract from the FACT that an alleged £170 £100 parking contravention resulted in Smart Parking being ordered to pay me over £3300 via a CCJ for a claim I brought against them for fees owing to me under a Fee Schedule (£2350) and damages for unlawful data processing and harassment (£750). 

Fixed that for you, it was a £100 pcn, the extra spurious £70 was the fictional £70 debt debt collectors fee,  regularly thrown out by the courts and hopefully to be banned next year

Its a regular statement for paragraph 3 in a defence too, plus the latter paragraph arguments in the template 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6574573/dcb-legal-letter-of-claim-parking-outside-the-lines/p3

No private pcn can be more than £100, but creative accounting seems to lead to a single pcn attracting a court claim of between £250 and £350 , unless it's SIP or Parking Eye 

Study the paragraph in the defence template where it's specifically mentioned in the defence these days 

But well done on your win and I hope that they pay the money,  even if it means a high court writ and HCE involvement 

I did think the alleged £170 was odd and, if Smart Parking had attempted to take out a claim against me, I would have challenged. But of course, despite 2 separate Letters Before Action approx 4 years apart, they didn't (another examples of not following the pre-action protocol).

I looked at the example you provided with the discontinuance. You guys are on the money, so well played to you all for challenging and assisting others here. Your reference to the "thread of shame" made me laugh. Can we start something up for CCJs against parking companies too? Perhaps a victories thread already exists.

NOTE: I cannot claim it to be a DCB Legal per se as a Defence was never filed with the court, but they, shamefully submitted the most recent Letter Before [No]Action.  

the_worm_that_turned

I'll be honest. I am a bit surprised that people have not attempted to enquire further as to how an alleged parking contravention for £170 against me (I was not the driver and no compliant Notice to Keeper was sent) was converted to Smart Parking being ordered to pay me over £3,300 via an enforceable CCJ.

I am not looking for glory but for a way to put a nail in the coffin of unlawful data processing and harassment.

NOTE: If you parked in a car park and wilfully didn't pay or overstayed then this is NOT for you. 

But if you genuinely are being harassed or if a regulated parking management company is deliberately flouting the rules etc. then the method I adopted might put a stop to these activities for everyone quick smart.

I see many, many people on here spending countless hours of their time, which they will never get back, and not being compensated for it. I was compensated for my time as it has value and I am damn certain that I will not give it freely to the likes of Smart Parking et al.

Shall we discuss a method to end this nonsense? The pros and cons of my Fee Schedule approach should, I feel, be talked about at least.

ChirpyChicken

A fee schedule which you mentioned will not work in a defended claim. If your claim had been defended you would have lost
You got lucky (so far) hopefully you will stay lucky and get payment with or without enforcement.
If they apply to set it aside and get permission to do and defend the claim they will also win.
You will then have forked out the cost of the claim (unless you got help with fees)