Smart ANPR PCN - overstay - LBS, Newark on Trent - Now debt collector

[honeybee13]

Thread reopened.

 

HB

[nickm911]

Thanks Honeybee13. 

I've just received a Letter before claim and PAP form from CST Law regarding this claim. 

pap.pdf

[honeybee13]

OK. We never recommend using their reply pack, it usually asks for stuff that's very helpful to them and not an advantage for you.

 

Try doing a search of CAG for 'snotty letter'. This is what we advise sending to show the sharks and their lawyers that you would be trouble if they try court. Any thread in the private parking Successes forum is likely to have a snotty letter if the person received a letter before claim.

 

HB

[nickm911]

I wasn't sure the advice given to me here was correct, so I posted about this on another forum that deals only with motoring issues. 

 

Heres the advice I got

 

Quote

Whoever told you Smart do not issue claims was wrong.

It was an easy appeal and they shouldn't have been ignored. It was really poor advice…

Write immediately to CST and tell them their client did not comply with PoFA and the keeper is clearly a different gender to the photographic evidence. Tell them that any claim would fail as you can prove you were not driving. On this basis tell them that they must cease and desist processing your personal data and to contact the driver.

Add that if they do progress to a claim then your letter will be used as part of a DPA counterclaim no less than £250.

Edit: some clarification needed

 

Quote

Ok, keeper needs to go on the offensive, stating facts. As it stands the keeper has been 'unreasonable' and could be sanctioned accordingly by forcing it to court.

The keeper needs to state (see my crossed out stuff) that there's no prospect of success and continuing to process the PI would be unlawful.

I reiterate the CAG advice was terrible. If you came here first you would have already had cancellation confirmation.

 

 

[dx100uk]

Nope.

 

So did you reply to their letter of claim...with a snotty letter giving nothing away of how you might defend a claim? Though pigs might fly too..

 

Dx

[nickm911]

The advice here was to wait and do nothing. I was only told to reply once the letter of claim had arrived.
In fact, I should have replied immediately and it would have been resolved before the letter of claim. 

Not replying to the PCN has just made the process more complicated and less likely to be resolved in my favour. 

 

here advice here was to wait and do nothing. I was only told to reply once the letter of claim had arrived.

In fact, I should have replied immediately, quoting the The Protection Of Freedoms Act, that they had missed 14 days and the female owner was not in the CCTV image, and instead was a male.  
I actually asked if I should do this and was told no.
(quoted below)

If I had written to them, that this all would have been been resolved before the letter of claim. 

Not replying to the PCN has just made the process more complicated and less likely to be resolved in my favour. 

The other forum has told me the advice given here was terrible, and I should have immediately notified Smart Parking they failed to comply requirements of Schedule 4 of The Protection Of Freedoms Act 2012 namely, but not limited to, failing to deliver the notice within the relevant period of 14 days as prescribed by section 9 (4) of the Act.
And cannot, therefore, transfer liability for the alleged charge from the driver at the time to me, the keeper.
 

Edited August 19, 2022 by dx100uk
unnecessary previous post quote removed

[FTMDave]

What utter nonsense.

 

As if a bunch of fleecers will back down due to what they will see as a technicality with the law.

 

Anyway, you can still do it.  Write to them then today, and tell them they failed to comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 of The Protection Of Freedoms Act 2012 namely, but not limited to, failing to deliver the notice within the relevant period of 14 days as prescribed by section 9 (4) of the Act, and cannot, therefore, transfer liability for the alleged charge from the driver at the time to you, the keeper.

 

See where it gets you.

 

Let's see who's right.

 

 

Edited August 19, 2022 by FTMDave
Typo

[FTMDave]

1 hour ago, nickm911 said:

Whoever told you Smart do not issue claims was wrong.

Well that's an easy one to sort out.  Google and find court claims that Smart have started.  It'll take you a long time.

 

In the six years I've been on the site not one motorist has ever had to pay Smart a penny.  100% record with CAG advice.

 

But it's your call.

[dx100uk]

On 23/07/2022 at 11:26, honeybee13 said:

Try doing a search of CAG for 'snotty letter'. This is what we advise sending to show the sharks and their lawyers that you would be trouble if they try court. Any thread in the private parking Successes forum is likely to have a snotty letter if the person received a letter before claim.

 

the advice was NOT TO IGNORE LOC ^^^^

 

and just type, no need to keep hitting quote multiple times in your replies!!

 

the advice you are getting is really really silly .

sadly typically spouted out by people that latterly then DM you saying i'll represent you (they can't) in court for about £160 then never turn up!!

scammers!!

 

dx

 

[nickm911]

you misunderstand. 

 

I haven't ignored the LOC I replied and told them they failed to comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 of The Protection Of Freedoms Act 2012 namely, but not limited to, failing to deliver the notice within the relevant period of 14 days as prescribed by section 9 (4) of the Act, and cannot, therefore, transfer liability for the alleged charge from the driver at the time to you, the keeper.

I'm referring to the earlier posts relating to the PCN and before the LOC was received. 
 

The other forum (which I haven't named as I dont know if its allowed here) has tons of posts relating to PCNs being late, appealing them and the parking company withdrawing them. 

It also has lots of posts about smart parking going to court. 

 

That's I why I said the initial advice given here was wrong. 

I was told to not respond to the PCN and wait for a LOC. 

(I would insert DX100 posts #19 and #25 here which specifically say dont reply, and dont tell them they missed the 14 days)
 

 

What I should have done is appeal to the PCN and have the parking company withdraw it - which is very common. 

Instead its now with a DCA threatening court action, who I'm trying to appeal the same thing to.  

Edited August 19, 2022 by nickm911

[dx100uk]

A DCA cannot do court, who told you that? Only the owner of a 'debt' can raise a court claim 

 

Pointless appealing to them.

A DCA is not a BAILIFF

And have 

ZERO legal powers on ANY debt - no matter what it's type 

 

Stop playing pointless letter tennis.

Go actually FIND a smart parking court claim.....  

 

Dx

 

 

 

 

[FTMDave]

How are you getting on with your solution of waving a magic wand at Smart, mentioning POFA, and the PCN disappears?

 

We have someone new today who did precisely that and got absolutely nowhere  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/452019-pcn-smart-parking-anpr-ntk-not-within-14-days-but-appealed/

 

[FTMDave]

So - cat got your tongue?

A month ago you were replying to posts every five minutes, telling regulars like Brassnecked, Honeybee, dx100uk and Lookinforinfo how they had been getting it wrong.  Regulars with over 15 years' experience each dealing with around 12,000 private parking invoice cases.

Now that it's proof of the pudding time and you can easily show links to Smart court cases (yeah, sure) as well as the letter from Smart cancelling your charge (aye, right) you've disappeared!  Very strange.

It's almost like the forum was right all along and you don't have this evidence!

At the time of writing 42 people have viewed this topic and many more will in the future.  It's essential the right info is out there and the wrong info is corrected.  So -

 

On 17/03/2022 at 12:46, dx100uk said:

this is smart parking

they have no record here of ever doing court

and

 

On 19/08/2022 at 14:18, nickm911 said:

Whoever told you Smart do not issue claims was wrong.

- either you or dx100uk have got it very, very, very wrong.  It's just common sense that you can't both be right.

Fortunately there's a new-fangled tool called Google which can easily show who's right.  I type in "VCS court claim" and - hey presto! - loads of court claims pop up.  I write "CEL court claim" and - lo and behold! - numerous examples of court instantly appear.  And Smart?

For the third time, can you please post a link to a Smart court claim so users here get the correct info?  Surely you want that.  Not a hundred cases or twenty or two - just one.  Thanks.
 

[FTMDave]

For the benefit of anyone coming across this thread.

Everything was going well until the OP found a scam site that pretended that there was an easy, magic way to get rid of the PCN.  And the OP was conned.  I suppose it's human nature to go for the easy solution rather than the difficult one, so it's not the OP's fault they were conned, and the forum is still around to help them should they want.

According to the scammers all you have to do is inform Smart Parking that they haven't followed Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and they will cancel the PCN.

As Smart Parking never follow POFA presumably every motorist can do this about every PCN and Smart's income will drop to zero and they will go into liquidation and the former company directors will have to beg on the streets to get money to eat ...

... as the saying goes, "if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is".

It is TBH a silly idea to think that companies in a vile industry that regularly flout the law will give up due to a legal technicality.

Unfortunately when someone gets a PCN it's a long slog, batting off the fleecers' threats over months - there is no magic wand.  Fortunately the forum has a great record of beating the fleecers time after time - just don't expect it to be quick.

After 16 years' experience fighting these charlatans we see there are similarities between the PPCs, but also differences.  VCS are the worst serial litigators.  Smart Parking however seem to have a business model that considers doing court a hassle and they are happy with the 85% (guesstimate) of motorists who think they have been fined and cough up.  They threaten court up to the last minute but we've never seen them actually take out a court claim here.

So far!

The OP stated we were wrong on all this after being conned but when asked repeatedly to show the actual evidence has disappeared.

[nickm911]

Sorry for the late reply, I've mainly been receiving advice from the other site (National Consumer Service) which certainly isn't a 'scam' site as FTMDave claims. Its just another forum, like this one with well informed members that have lots of experience with motoring issues.  

While I still think this is a good site (consumeractiongroup), it has a very broad range of topics, where National Consumer Service specifically targets motoring issues. 

Anyway, Since following the advice from National Consumer Service I havent heard a peep from either smart parking or the debt collector. 

I'm not suggesting they have dropped the matter, but maybe have realised its not worth their effort and just put it on a pile for a rainy day. 

In any case, they aren't bothering me at the moment. 
 

[dx100uk]

Oh dear..

 

Dx

[brassnecked]