Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Can a PPC (claimant) refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
    • S13 (2)The creditor may not exercise the right under paragraph 4 to recover from the keeper any unpaid parking charges specified in the notice to keeper if, within the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which that notice was given, the creditor is given— (a)a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement; (b)a copy of the hire agreement; and (c)a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement. As  Arval has complied with the above they cannot be pursued by EC----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S14 [1]   the creditor may recover those charges (so far as they remain unpaid) from the hirer. (2)The conditions are that— (a)the creditor has within the relevant period given the hirer a notice in accordance with sub-paragraph (5) (a “notice to hirer”), together with a copy of the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2) and the notice to keeper; (b)a period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the notice to hirer was given has elapsed;  As ECP did not send copies of the documents to your company and they have given 28 days instead of 21 days they have failed to comply with  the Act so you and your Company are absolved from paying. That is not to say that they won't continue asking to be paid as they do not have the faintest idea how PoFA works. 
    • Euro have got a lot wrong and have failed to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4.  According to Section 13 after ECP have written to Arval they should then send a NTH to the Hirer  which they have done.This eliminates Arval from any further pursuit by ECP. When they wrote to your company they should have sent copies of everything that they asked Arval for. This is to prove that your company agree what happened on the day of the breach. If ECP then comply with the Act they are allowed to pursue the hirer. If they fail, to comply they cannot make the hirer pay. They can pursue until they are blue in the face but the Hirer is not lawfully required to pay them and if it went to Court ECP would lose. Your company could say who was driving but the only person that can be pursued is the Hirer, there does not appear to be an extension for a driver to be pursued. Even if there was, because ECP have failed miserably to comply with the Act  they still have no chance of winning in Court. Here are the relevant Hire sections from the Act below.
    • Thank-you FTMDave for your feedback. May I take this opportunity to say that after reading numerous threads to which you are a contributor, I have great admiration for you. You really do go above and beyond in your efforts to help other people. The time you put in to help, in particular with witness statements is incredible. I am also impressed by the way in which you will defer to others with more experience should there be a particular point that you are not 100% clear on and return with answers or advice that you have sought. I wish I had the ability to help others as you do. There is another forum expert that I must also thank for his time and patience answering my questions and allowing me to come to a “penny drops” moment on one particular issue. I believe he has helped me immensely to understand and to strengthen my own case. I shall not mention who it is here at the moment just in case he would rather I didn't but I greatly appreciate the time he took working through that issue with me. I spent 20+ years of working in an industry that rules and regulations had to be strictly adhered to, indeed, exams had to be taken in order that one had to become qualified in those rules and regulations in order to carry out the duties of the post. In a way, such things as PoFA 2012 are rules and regulations that are not completely alien to me. It has been very enjoyable for me to learn these regulations and the law surrounding them. I wish I had found this forum years ago. I admit that perhaps I had been too keen to express my opinions given that I am still in the learning process. After a suitable period in this industry I became Qualified to teach the rules and regulations and I always said to those I taught that there is no such thing as a stupid question. If opinions, theories and observations are put forward, discussion can take place and as long as the result is that the student is able to clearly see where they went wrong and got to that moment where the penny drops then that is a valuable learning experience. No matter how experienced one is, there is always something to learn and if I did not know the answer to a question, I would say, I don't know the answer to that question but I will go and find out what the answer is. In any posts I have made, I have stated, “unless I am wrong” or “as far as I can see” awaiting a response telling me what I got wrong, if it was wrong. If I am wrong I am only too happy to admit it and take it as a valuable learning experience. I take the point that perhaps I should not post on other peoples threads and I shall refrain from doing so going forward. 🤐 As alluded to, circumstances can change, FTMDave made the following point that it had been boasted that no Caggers, over two years, who had sent a PPC the wrong registration snotty letter, had even been taken to court, let alone lost a court hearing .... but now they have. I too used the word "seemed" because it is true, we haven't had all the details. After perusing this forum I believe certain advice changed here after the Beavis case, I could be wrong but that is what I seem to remember reading. Could it be that after winning the above case in question, a claimant could refer back to this case and claim that a defendant had not made use of the appeal process, therefore allowing the claimant to win? Again, in this instance only, I do not know what is to be gained by not making an appeal or concealing the identity of the driver, especially if it is later admitted that the defendant was the driver and was the one to input the incorrect VRN in error. So far no one has educated me as to the reason why. But, of course, when making an appeal, it should be worded carefully so that an error in the appeal process cannot be referred back to. I thought long and hard about whether or not to post here but I wanted to bring up this point for discussion. Yes, I admit I have limited knowledge, but does that mean I should have kept silent? After I posted that I moved away from this forum slightly to find other avenues to increase my knowledge. I bought a law book and am now following certain lawyers on Youtube in the hope of arming myself with enough ammunition to use in my own case. In one video titled “7 Reasons You Will LOSE Your Court Case (and how to avoid them)” by Black Belt Barrister I believe he makes my point by saying the following, and I quote: “If you ignore the complaint in the first instance and it does eventually end up in court then it's going to look bad that you didn't co-operate in the first place. The court is not going to look kindly on you simply ignoring the company and not, let's say, availing yourself of any kind of appeal opportunities, particularly if we are talking about parking charge notices and things like that.” This point makes me think that, it is not such a bizarre judgement in the end. Only in the case of having proof of payment and inputting an incorrect VRN .... could it be worthwhile making a carefully worded appeal in the first instance? .... If the appeal fails, depending on the reason, surely this could only help if it went to court? As always, any feedback gratefully received.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

PCN from Vehicle Control Services LTD


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2150 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hello,

 

 

Got issued with the following ticket (below) on my motorbike yesterday evening. I parked in a side street in the centre of Nottingham and didn't realise it was a private street it was dark etc, however when I looked properly there were actually 4 signs on display.

 

I have read this forum thoroughly and have seen all the advice on how the system appears to work (the Private Parking Stickys and threads) and pro-forma letters etc. I've also noticed that the company who issued my notice (VCS Parking Enforcement Specialists) are a member of the BPA: (British Parking Association)

 

It would appear that the maximum amount allowed to charge is £75 under BPA guidelines and the company has asked for £80. So it would appear that they have breached the BPA code of conduct?

 

Other than that the option open to me seems to be that I pursue the letters option and hope that they drop the charge?

 

I was wondering if anyone had any suggestions on what would be my best course of action.

 

Kind regards

tom4rse

 

 

 

front.jpgback.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 163
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Best course of action -ignore it. It is a private ticket proporting to look like an official police/council one - which is an under a few acts, namely the Fraud Act 2006.

 

The BPA is nothing more than a trade body, it has no legal standing. They will act like this whether they are in the BPA or not. It's like some of us setting up the "BMA" (British Murderers Association) and saying that you're only allowed to stab your victim not more than twice when killing them - it's still murder and it's illegal like the above notice.

 

See the sticky threads. If you receive a DCA letter then say the debt is in dispute. Don't worry. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

On a slightly pedantic note, and although the very bottom of the back of the ticket is not visible, it seems that the Vehicle Control Services Ltd may be in breach of company law - they are supposed to show their company registration number and place of registration and registered office address (which cannot be a PO Box) on their stationery.

 

Why not drop them in it with Companies House?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, "Issue Date" is not good enough. To be valid the ticket has to have "Date of Issue" according to the DoT Model Ticket. There may be other infringements - I can't remember the whole model ticket. Look up a thread by "MondeoST24" - there's a lot of cracking information about PCN's in there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Aaaaand we're off....

 

Just to keep you informed, my "Notice To Owner of Intent to Issue Court Proceedings" letter dropped on the mat this morning. (quite intimidating letter to the untrained eye!)

 

But fear not, my response will be in Monday's post.

 

Will keep you informed of their response.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Aaaaand we're off....

 

Just to keep you informed, my "Notice To Owner of Intent to Issue Court Proceedings" letter dropped on the mat this morning. (quite intimidating letter to the untrained eye!)

 

But fear not, my response will be in Monday's post.

 

Will keep you informed of their response.

 

First the invoice designed to look like a valid PCN and now an NTO its getting a bit rich. These guys are sailing close to the wind with their documentation. I'd say they are acting they are either committing fraud or are very close to it. Are you going to report them?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This does not constitute legal advice and is not represented as a substitute for legal advice from an appropriately qualified person or firm.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

To whom and for what?

 

Office of Fair Trading

Local Trading Standards Officer

The Police

 

The offence at the moment would be under Administration of Justice Act 1970 by mimicing official documents, purporting to give them status which they simply don't have. Later, further down the line, when their threats become repetitive and oppressive there is the Prevention of Harressment Act 1997 and even the Fraud Act 2007?.

 

Sounds cynical but don't expect too much. A lot of forum members have complained about an awful lot more and got nowhere. The Police simply aren't interested, local Trading Standards have a patchy understanding of Private Tickets and OFT usually don't respond to individual complaints. If however, you enjoy letter writing and are up for it then by all means go ahead.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

Hello there,

 

I have a response letter (see below) also included with the letter was a lovely photo of my motorbike next to the no-parking sign and also a copy of the parking ticket issued.

 

Was interested to read in the 5th paragraph: "A recent decision by the Court of Appeal has confirmed that provided adequate notice of unauthorized parking is given, the driver/registered keeper accepts the Terms as set out and therefore consents to the penalty charge which maybe incurred for contravening the regulations"

 

Now lets ignore the fact they have admitted this is a penalty charge (thus no contract etc) I was wondering to which decision by the Court of Appeal the nice lady who wrote me this letter was referring?

 

Anyone know?

 

Also, any comments on the letter to include in my response?

 

Cheers

Tom

 

 

parkingletter.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello there,

 

I have a response letter (see below) also included with the letter was a lovely photo of my motorbike next to the no-parking sign and also a copy of the parking ticket issued.

 

Was interested to read in the 5th paragraph: "A recent decision by the Court of Appeal has confirmed that provided adequate notice of unauthorized parking is given, the driver/registered keeper accepts the Terms as set out and therefore consents to the penalty charge which maybe incurred for contravening the regulations"

 

Now lets ignore the fact they have admitted this is a penalty charge (thus no contract etc) I was wondering to which decision by the Court of Appeal the nice lady who wrote me this letter was referring?

 

Anyone know?

 

Also, any comments on the letter to include in my response?

 

Cheers

Tom

Sounds like they are in fantasy land. As they would say in the house of commons "they are not being entirely straight forward". I'm sure we would have heard from our legal friends such as PeteJ and legaladvisor had this been the case not to mention our resident PPC apologists.

 

A recent decision that overturned the precedents of the Dunlop case which has stood for over a 100 years.

 

I think you have covered the salient points.

 

Only the driver can be held to any "contract". Regardless of any case law third parties cannot be made party to terms in contracts that they have no knowledge of and do not agree to.

 

One other comment ask them to quote relevant cases to back their claims that the BPA charges are "not unfair at law". Says who?

 

I think a Have Sex and Travel letter quoting the salient points is required.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This does not constitute legal advice and is not represented as a substitute for legal advice from an appropriately qualified person or firm.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

One other comment ask them to quote relevant cases to back their claims that the BPA charges are "not unfair at law". Says who?

Had a thought on this one last night. Could they be referring to the charges for clamping. There is some case law about reasonable charges there. But the BPA charges that is complete rubbish.

 

The BPA is a trade association with a very loose code of compliance. They don't set the rates that their members are required to charge just that they follow the code of conduct.

 

While we're on the subject of the BPA you might want to point out the BPA requires in their code of conduct requires them

 

Quoting from section 2..... (click here for the full code of conduct)

 

2. Manage their affairs professionally so that their operations are

conducted efficiently and effectively and in accordance with good

business practice including –

Trading fairly and responsibly and only employing contractors

that are competent to the task in hand.

Undertaking their activities honestly and with integrity and not

knowingly misrepresenting themselves or misleading others.

Ensuring that they operate to the highest possible standards

thereby protecting the interests of their shareholders and

customers.

• Employing staff who are competent and qualified and adopting

an approach to staff development that encourages further

training.

• Operating from established premises and ensuring that they are

adequately insured for all relevant risks.

Striving to resolve any complaints and disputes quickly and

equitably.

 

You might want to point out that their documentation is bordering on or is dishonest by mimicing official documents which is an offense under the AJA S40. etc. So are they acting honestly. Hoist on their own petard.

 

I would suggest that you complain to the BPA but as this a trade body made up of the "enemy" (i.e. PPCs) you are probably urinating in the breeze for all the good it will do.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This does not constitute legal advice and is not represented as a substitute for legal advice from an appropriately qualified person or firm.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

please does anyone know of anybody who has actually gone to court with ukpc ltd as i am currently in litigation with them and i will fight to the death!!!!!!!!!!

 

I think the lack of answers to your post is probably a good indication. Have a look at this thread here. You'll see a number of people indicate that they had loads of letters and threats of court action but the reality is zilch.

 

Stand firm.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This does not constitute legal advice and is not represented as a substitute for legal advice from an appropriately qualified person or firm.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Progress report so far for those considering what to do:

 

I got a Notice to Owner of Intent to Issue Court Proceedings on 3rd Jan, I wrote a letter to the company (see template letters). They ignored my letter.

 

I got a "Final Demand Notice" on 12th Feb which stated Failure to Pay Will Result in Court Action in big bold letters. I wrote a letter which was very similar to the earlier letters as they never actually answered any of my requests for information.

 

They ignored my letter and sent a I included the Cease and Desist line (see template letters).

 

I have received no further correspondence from the Parking Company to date.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Hello I am new to the site and have been reading Tom4rse's threads the same happened to me last night and I am furious £80 is extortion. The signs were very high up and not very clear.

 

Can you tell me please of you have heard anything more from these crooks?

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello I am new to the site and have been reading Tom4rse's threads the same happened to me last night and I am furious £80 is extortion. The signs were very high up and not very clear.

 

Can you tell me please of you have heard anything more from these crooks?

 

Thanks

Hi,

 

Welcome to the forums.

 

I think the lack of activity on this thread indicates the level of court action i.e. none.

 

You have an invoice for an alleged breach of contract.

 

Don't pay up. It's a [problem]. Have a read of the private parking charges guide in the stickies section and you'll see why.

 

They'll follow the usual business model of these companies which is loads of threatening letters and then silence.

 

This company isn't the only one at it. One of them recently took people to court and lost (google "Excel Mansfield").

 

A word of caution VCS lurk on these forums and will attempt to identify you from anything you post. Don't put dates, times, names, locations etc in any of your posts. They won't win in court but they will try to coerce you into paying with all manner of threats.

 

Some people advise ignoring everything apart from court documents. Others advise using the template letters in the stickies section.

 

What you should definitely do is wait until they have obtained the RK details from the DVLA, which costs them £2.50.

 

The choice as to how to proceed is then yours.

 

If you have any questions post back.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This does not constitute legal advice and is not represented as a substitute for legal advice from an appropriately qualified person or firm.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Hi,

 

Firstly I am new to this site and must thank you all for your threads because I too got a PCN. I have appealed which was a waste of time, I went to see the police which was a waste of time because it is a private company, but then fortunately hit on this site and received more valuable information.

I intend to now take your advice and wait for the court letters!

Just so annoying when I have got 101 other better things I could be doing with my time but on principle I intend to stick it out!

Thanks again to all and I will keep you posted

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Parking Charge Notice - Vehicle Control services LTD

 

£80 fine.

 

URGENT HELP NEEDED AS GOING ON HOLIDAY TONIGHT

 

I was parked in a private car park which was locked at 18:45. I called the car park number at 21:00 and decided not to release and go early the next day as advised. A ticket had been issued at 20:47 the previous evening. The latest you can buy a ticket until is 18:30.

 

Should I pay or not?

 

Ticket looks to be completed ok.

 

Ticket says 'issue date' and not 'date of issue'.

 

Payment address is a PO Box with city and postcode.

 

It had been snowing heavily.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

I was parked on a Private Road and not in a car park, but I have followed other threads and basically ignored all letters.

 

I appealed prior to joining this consumer group which was a waste of time and since then I have had a 2 letters (notice of intent to issue court proceedings and a final demand notice). I was even advised by a solicitor to ignore all letters until I receive letters from the court.

 

I have not yet received any court letters and hope that's the last of it.

 

My advice, enjoy your holiday and forget about it!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am new to this forum and I hope someone can give me some guidance on a similar issue.

 

 

My car was parked in a bay which looks like a parking bay (with double yellow lines though!) outside a NCP car park today. (these bays are are parked with cars everyday). There are notices along the access road about it being private property, etc, however they are all displayed on the other side of the road and nothing was displayed on the side of the "parking bay". I genuinely thought that those notices only apply to one side of the road where there is no parking bays as the same road also leads to a recently disused Council car park.

 

After reading all the threads, I am not sure if the driver has "willingly" entered into a contract with them as the notices are quite well displayed. If they have CCTV (at entrance of the NCP car park) that could proof whom the driver was at the time (whether it is the RK or not) , would it mean that the driver has no case for appeal?

 

 

The ticket is exactly the same type as the one issued to tom4rse in Dec 2007 and it doesn’t mention anything about penalty on the ticket. It just asked for £80 payment or additional £40 charge after 7 days, etc.

 

btw, anyone know what happed to tom4rse case?

Edited by NOGLOW
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

I received a PCN very similar to the one tom4rse shows at the start of this thread. I was parked behind my oen rented house in a private car park that I do have a permit for. The permit had slipped down and was partially obscured by the dark tint at the bottom of the windscreen and an old parking ticket. I have since appealed and sent VCS a copy of the permit to which they replied with a picture of the obscured permit in my windscreen. I am a student and as such was not around over christmas to check post at my term time address. By the time I had recieved this second letter the charge had gone up to £120 from the original, and still proposterous, £80. This was when I though it was time to have a look into this and started reading various threads on here, eventually deciding to ignore the letter, particularly because I have already shelled out £80 this term after falling for the threatening letters.

 

This morning I got back having been at my mum's house since Thursday to find a brightly coloured letter titled (in red font) "NOTICE TO OWNER OF INTENT TO ISSUE COURT PROCEEDINGS". It then follows with large yellow highlighted sections and more red capitals that if I do not pay them I will have to pay court fees and solicitors fees totalling another £80 and "WHICH MAY LEAD TO A WARRANT BEING ISSUED TO THE BAILIFFS".

 

Does anyone have any experience of these types of letters or any knowledge of VCS actually taking anyone to court in one of these cases?

 

Any help would be greatly appreciated,

 

Thanks.

 

P.s. £120 is not something that I can have in the next 7 days so my hand is somewhat forced into not paying!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

I received a PCN very similar to the one tom4rse shows at the start of this thread. I was parked behind my oen rented house in a private car park that I do have a permit for. The permit had slipped down and was partially obscured by the dark tint at the bottom of the windscreen and an old parking ticket. I have since appealed and sent VCS a copy of the permit to which they replied with a picture of the obscured permit in my windscreen. I am a student and as such was not around over christmas to check post at my term time address. By the time I had recieved this second letter the charge had gone up to £120 from the original, and still proposterous, £80. This was when I though it was time to have a look into this and started reading various threads on here, eventually deciding to ignore the letter, particularly because I have already shelled out £80 this term after falling for the threatening letters.

 

This morning I got back having been at my mum's house since Thursday to find a brightly coloured letter titled (in red font) "NOTICE TO OWNER OF INTENT TO ISSUE COURT PROCEEDINGS". It then follows with large yellow highlighted sections and more red capitals that if I do not pay them I will have to pay court fees and solicitors fees totalling another £80 and "WHICH MAY LEAD TO A WARRANT BEING ISSUED TO THE BAILIFFS".

 

Does anyone have any experience of these types of letters or any knowledge of VCS actually taking anyone to court in one of these cases?

 

Any help would be greatly appreciated,

 

Thanks.

 

P.s. £120 is not something that I can have in the next 7 days so my hand is somewhat forced into not paying!

 

If you've read these threads then you'll know they aren't likely to take you to court. Unless the contract for the permits is very precise you have complied with it in that it was displayed albeit partially, as their photo demonstrates - you've got them QED.

 

I would suspect that the contract terms will fail under the "Unfair Terms in Consumer contracts" because the term puts you at a considerable disadvantage and the terms were not individually negotiated.

 

It could be argued that no loss has been demonstrated and therefore this amount is a penalty charge and again unenforcable.

 

Lastly this is a typical desperate "plea for some money before we give up." They are very unlikely to take this to court and even if they do you still get to defend yourself and will in all likelihood win.

 

I would continue to ignore and respond only to actual court papers -which you need to check with the HM Court Service as these companies are sometimes known to send a copy of a claim form before they actually initiate court action.

 

Have a read of the private parking charges guide in the stickies and you'll see there is a lot that they fail on. Look also at Problems PPCs face.

 

VCS, like most PPCs, are good at threats and not very good on follow through.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This does not constitute legal advice and is not represented as a substitute for legal advice from an appropriately qualified person or firm.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2150 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...