PCN Greenwich Shopping Park, Charlton - Smart Parking Ltd

[ericsbrother]

As you have appealed to Smart then you should appeal to POPLA as this then costs Smart parking money.

 

Your appeal is quite simple,

 

 

" the terms of the contract offered to you by way of an advertisement on the web site and by the signage at the site was not breached as this allows for 3 hours parking.

 

 

The claim that there was a breach because it was a match day is simply incorrect because there is no definition of what a match day is in the contract nor a list of when these days are anywhere.

 

 

If there was a planning Consent issue such as with the Sainsburys car park at Selhurst Park then Smart Parking should be obliged to produce this as evidence of a variation of the offered and accepted three hour limit.

 

 

Any variation that is not part of a planning approval is an unfair term under the Consumer Contracts Regs because there was no pre-contract information regarding this matter and the offer was by way of a distance contract so the information is required by law or the contract is unenforceable"

 

. Common sense would dictate that if the claimed breach refers to a Charlton FC home match

then it would be blindingly obvious that the arrival time and the time for the vehicle was actually parked was outside the playing time of any likely match so it cannot be said that this rule is anything other than a deterrent

rather than an actual offer of terms designed to be accepted and so any claim would be an unfair penalty clause and again unenforceable.

[ericsbrother]

YOU ONLY EVER REFER TO YOURSELF AS THE REGISTERED KEEPER, NEVER IDENTIFY THE DRIVER.

TBH it doesnt really matter about POPLA, the idea of appealing to them is to waste Smart Parking's money as they have to pay for your appeal. By all means try but the code wont work so send the appeal through the post.

[ericsbrother]

too late for POPLA now.

You say they called a member of your family? how did they call them and was that person the registered keeper of the vehicle? If not then you need to complain to the ICO about that flagrant breach of the DPA. You should also write a complaint to the BPA about the same.

If you want help you must be specific about what has happened.

[ericsbrother]

the Beavis case is mostly irrelevant but they love to quote it to frighten you nto thinking that they are invincible.

Now, if your sister is getting these letters she should complain tot he statutory authority that oversee debt collection and other financial companies, the Financial Conduct Authority. Also there is aanother body that sets out the guideleines for debt collection activity so another complaint to them as well Finally a complaint to the ICO for the misuse of her personal data. Once that ball is rolling she may wish to let the numpties as DR+ that she intends to sue them for mususe of her personal data as she is not the person they are after and she doesnt even own a car etc. The B's wont admit their errors though but hoefully the regulatory bodies will at least poke them and tell them to behave.

 

Lastly you must read the other threads here. You would then not ask about DR+ or about using emails. NO NEVER EMAIL THESE PEOPLE it only gives them a method of harassing you for free.[