Hi,

I'm new here.

I've been reading through the forums about this scoundrels (VCS) and was wondering if anyone could help advice me on my case.

This is the first time ever experiencing being threatened like this.

A long time ago, I read through the forums saying tht this sort of claims would never stand in court unlike the summons that comes from the police or the council.

I have been ignoring their letters all along.

They have been quiet for a long time

I thought it just went away and only

until recently, I received a letter from BW saying that they have been instructed by VCS to pursue my case and asked me to cough up the £144

(£90 for the PCN and £54 for client's initial legal cost which they claimed were detailed in the car park terms and conditions).

They have included the letter from VCS which just says they have now passed my contact to BW to deal with.

From memory, I remembered the car park was actually located beside a train station in town and it was pouring for a good 20mins when I drove in to the carpark that noon.

I remembered disputing with VCS a long time ago

notifying them that I didn't park at any of the bays but was merely waiting in the carpark to fetch my sister who was with my 8mnths old baby at the time who was stranded at the train station and waiting for the rain to stop before they could make their way to the car.

I didn't detail all these events when I wrote to them last (2011).

Merely told them that I was just fetching someone at the car park.

now I have this letter from them to deal with, but I'm not entirely sure if I could still ignore or do I need to respond to them now?

Is this what I could consider a letter before action?

Btw, the car reg tht they claimed in the letter was sold 4yrs back.

I would appreciate some guidance and point me in the direction

what I should do next and what how to respond to this letter.

If they ever drag me into a court case how would I ever work on a valid defence????????? *sigh*

I just don't want to pay and have no intention to pay this extortionate sum to them.

If they are that hard up,

I could always pay that £1.20 that they claim I owe for that 20mins of waiting in tht car park!

Scan0017.pdf

just send them the std one line denial letter you've seen in threads here

that way atleast it might lessen the chances of a claimform.

dx

hi dx,

thanks for replying. would this be the one you are refering to...? or this would be way too much at this stage?

I write in response to your letter dated 9th of August 2016, the contents of which are noted. As registered keeper I have no idea about the parking charge at all. When or where it was for is a mystery to me.

As the pre action protocols expect us to exchange sufficient information to understand each other’s position, please forward to myself the original parking charge notice and a picture of the signs at the location as well as the operator’s contract which allows them to operate at the site (or indeed confirmation they own the land in question).

As well as the information already requested, please answer the following questions:-

What type of car park is it?

What contravention gives a cause of action?

Who contravened your rules?

Who you are pursuing?

Have you followed the rules laid down in the Protection of freedoms act 2012 schedule 4?

How is the £54 extra made up ?

Not only will this information help comply with the pre action protocols it will also help achieve the over riding objective.

Having done some research on your claims, I request that if you ignore my requests for information that your claim complies with:

CPR 16

Contents of the claim form

16.2

(1) The claim form must –

(a) contain a concise statement of the nature of the claim

Contents of the particulars of claim

16.4

(1) Particulars of claim must include –

(a) a concise statement of the facts on which the claimant relies;

Practice direction 16

Other matters to be included in particulars of claim

7.5 Where a claim is based upon an agreement by conduct, the particulars of claim must specify the conduct relied on and state by whom, when and where the acts constituting the conduct were done.

CPR 22

Documents to be verified by a statement of truth

22.1

(1) The following documents must be verified by a statement of truth –

(a) a statement of case

Practice direction 22

Who may sign the statement of truth

3.1 In a statement of case, a response or an application notice, the statement of truth must be signed by

(2) the legal representative of the party or litigation friend.

3.7 Where a party is legally represented, the legal representative may sign the statement of truth on his behalf. The statement signed by the legal representative will refer to the client’s belief, not his own. In signing he must state the capacity in which he signs and the name of his firm where appropriate.

3.9 The individual who signs a statement of truth must print his full name clearly beneath his signature.

3.10 A legal representative who signs a statement of truth must sign in his own name and not that of his firm or employer.

Practice direction 7E

Signature

10 Any provision of the CPR which requires a document to be signed by any person is satisfied by that person entering their name on an online form.

I await your response.

Yours sincerely

thks.

topspin

No that's total baloney

The one line reply

I'll find one later

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?468618-06-11-15-VCS-PCN-in-St-Marys-Gate-Retail-Park-in-Sheffield-now-BW-Letter

Post 5 above nothing more

OK, noted. thanks dx. will get tht one sent today. will post up when i get a reply from them.

topspin

Shame you identified to them in 2011 that you were the driver, since had you not done so, they wouldn't now be able to make a case against you as the keeper. You'll have a somewhat more complicated defence as a result!

yeah, silly me for panicking to give such reasoning back then! *sigh*

wonder if there's any chance of winning this one at all

or just pay off tht £144 which i don't want to part with?

worse case scenario if this one goes to small claims and proceeds to hearing,

the cost would escalate to filing for a hearing

and also cost for judge to try the case wouldnt it.

would then cost up to £500ish i reckon?

correct me if i'm wrong

na usually rolls in at £243 ish

this is ONE example of many here

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?442660-Excel-BW-peel-centre-Stockport-PCN-23-2-15-now-claimform-help/page2

they'll just issue the std claimform IF they do.

the same as the above.

should be easy to buff away if defended

no one has lost to them yet that HAS defended.

dx

They have sent me a 'discount offer' letter recently and asking me to cough £108 instead of the £144 (but for a limited period only).

Do I really have to give them a reason why I have disputed the PCN?

Because in their letter they highlighted on the fact that I have failed to give valid reasons for disputing the PCN when I told them to refer back to VCS (their client) on the matter.

Can someone help advice me what to do next?

Many thanks.

Do you still have the PCN you originally received? if so blank out personal details and post. also do you have any pictures of the signs at the site from the time? i would be almost certain that their signs and PCN from the time would not be sufficient to form a contract.

you ignore everything they say from now on unless they issue a N1 claim via the county court.

Let them spend their time and money on this, not you.

If they decide to go down the court route then come back here for advice on how to defeat a claim

but other than that all of their scribble is designed to get you to believe that they are somehow right.

No, I wouldn't have the original PCN nw.

I think I binned it a long time ago when I found out from the forum I could just ignore them since they would not stand a chance winning in court.

Signboard wise, I have a feeling they were newly updated like a yr or 2yrs ago.

I think the current operator now is with Excel Parking (if my memory serves me well).

Is Excel Parking and VCS Ltd the same co btw?

Can someone confirm this?

I could go and take a pix of the current signboard at the carpark if tht helps?

thanks ericsbrother. i'll ignore them for now and wait in anticipation for the court 'ping pong' game to begin

topspin

yes excel/vcs same lot

No, I wouldn't have the original PCN nw.

I think I binned it a long time ago when I found out from the forum I could just ignore them since they would not stand a chance winning in court.

Signboard wise, I have a feeling they were newly updated like a yr or 2yrs ago.

I think the current operator now is with Excel Parking (if my memory serves me well).

Is Excel Parking and VCS Ltd the same co btw?

Can someone confirm this?

I could go and take a pix of the current signboard at the carpark if tht helps?

Wouldn't worry about going to take pics unless they start small claims action.

I doubt they will have sufficient pictures of the locations of the signs and the terms of the signs from the time,

and even if they do there is no way for you or a court to know that those are the actual signs that were present, and even then their signs wouldn't be capable of forming a contract most probably.

And you could get a copy of the PCN from them either through DPA request, or better still wait until you received their evidence pack if they decided to go the court route as the PCN almost certainly wouldn't be correct to sufficiently form a contract.

except they are different legal entities so a contract with one is not automatically transferrable to another.

This is important in consumer contracts,

less so for the agreement between the landowner and operator as there can be a transfer of obligation between 2 different operators if the LL agrees to it.

yes excel/vcs same lot

taking pictures will always help because if they show the any signage as proof you can show that they are trying it on if they use the new ones.

I doubt if they will try court,

they can make enough money out of those who just pay up without the risk of being found out by pursuing a claim they know they will lose.

The current rash of claims will determine thier next move,

I bet they lose the majority of the defended ones only winning those where people argue what is mitigation rather than getting properly stuck in to the rights of the parking co to make a claim.