Smart Parking ANPR PCN - Tottenham Hale Retail Park, Tottenham, London

[Mark71]

Good evening guys..

 

Hope you are all in good health.

 

I was posted a parking charge by Smart Parking for overstaying the free parking time in North London.

 

I accept this may have been possible, but I put the letter to one side and forgot all about it.

 

I have now received a letter from debt recovery plus reminding me of the outstanding parking charge but is now double the cost  

 

I am willing to pay the charge but I don't think its right I am expected to now pay double the charge.

 

I have tried to pay on line and by phone, but Smart Parking will now not take my payment.

 

Any advise or do I just pay them whatever they decide to demand?

Edited March 15, 2022 by dx100uk
5 x fine replaced with charge - it is NOT A FINE!!

[dx100uk]

where does their paperwork use the word FINE please?

 

 

dx

[Mark71]

Yes your right! its a parking charge

[dx100uk]

doh!

 

 

please fill this out:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?462118-Have-you-received-a-Parking-Ticket

[ericsbrother]

why are you willing to pay a charge that is probably unlawful? Read a good few posts and then tell us about the event. Smart are a misnomer.

[DragonFly1967]

Smart are a misnomer.

 

Oh, now be fair....

 

"Completely Useless Shyster Parking Cowboy Wannabe's" wouldn't fit on the sign

[ericsbrother]

that is protected by trade mark. CEL own the rights to the word shyster when used in relation to parking.

[Mark71]

Thanks for all the comments.

 

Surprising the information you find when you search the right things.. (not sure why I would associate a charge with a fine!)

 

You receive letters like these and you feel your obligated to pay, not knowing any better. (Not reading enough on CAG!)

 

 

For tickets received through the post [ANPR camera capture] (Notice to Keeper)

 

please answer the following questions.

 

1 Date of the infringement: 18 February 2017

 

2 Date on the NTK: 23 February 2017

 

[this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date]

 

3 Date received: Not sure as I didn't keep the envelope and forgot about it as soon as I saw it.. (Only way to keep the blood pressure low)

 

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [y/n?] N

 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Y

 

6 Have you appealed? {y/n?] post up you appeal] N

Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up

 

7 Who is the parking company? Smart Parking Limited

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town]: Tottenham Hale Retail Park, Tottenham, London

For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under.

 

There are two official bodies, the BPA and the IAS. If you are unsure,

please check HERE

 

IAS

 

If you have received any other correspondence, please mention it here

 

I have taken no action.

 

Please advise if possible.

[silverfox1961]

Hi

I am very surprised that (not so) Smart are not mentioning PoFA as they are members of the BPA and all their companies require this.

 

As they haven't mentioned sch 4, they are unable to go after the keeper, only the driver and you have no need to give them that detail.

 

So far this year (as far as I can find) Smart have taken no one to court. DR+ are a debt collector who act for the parking companies and have no power whatsoever over you.

 

You have ignored this so far so I suggest you carry on ignoring unless you get court papers.

[DragonFly1967]

Could we see the NTK please, devoid of any personal information, bar codes, QR codes etc.

 

If you could then convert it to a PDF and follow the upload guide to attach it to a post

[Mark71]

Good evening,

 

Sorry for not getting back sooner. I could only scan in the letters once back at work.

 

Please see attached.

 

Attached is the only correspondence I have received relating to the parking charge.

 

Please let me know if I have completed the "ANPR camera capture, Notice to Keeper" correctly.

 

Thanks

 

 

2017-03-29 DR+ Chase letter.pdf PCN.pdf

[silverfox1961]

I have seen the NTK and I can see no mention of PoFA 2012. This must be included within the body of the NTK for Smart Parking to be able to chase the keeper. It is also a requirement of the BPA for its members to abide by PoFA in the code of practice.

 

As they have failed the most simplest of tests, they cannot hold the keeper liable so my opinion stands.

 

Did they send other paperwork with the NTK? If so, does that mention anything about PoFA?

[Mark71]

Hi,

 

Nope no other notification or information just what is attached.

 

 

[DragonFly1967]

Oh, where to start with that NTK!

 

Doesn't mention POFA 2012, so no keeper liability.

 

As they're not using the POFA, they have absolutely no right to access your data (via the DVLA) despite any claim they may make to the contrary, so I'd be firing off complaints to the DVLA (breach of KADOE contract) the ICO (breach of Data Protection (against both Daft Parking AND the DVLA) and the BPA Ltd for Daft Parkings' breach of their AoS CoP.

 

As usual, they're misrepresenting ParkingLie -v- Beavis. That judgement refers to a very particular set of circumstances, which that car park probably doesn't fit.

 

 

I agree wholeheartedly with Silverfox1961. They aren't using POFA (they have to mention it on the NTK if they are (and they don't)) so they've not got a leg to stand on. And even if they were trying to use POFA, their NTK is deficient in several areas anyway, all of which would breach the POFA and render it mute.

 

My dog could design a better NTK than that! Perhaps I should get in touch with Daft Parking and offer his services