Jump to content

sh3ffield

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    30
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About sh3ffield

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Unfortuantely it can take up to six months for the right to appeal to be decided so as yet I've heard nothing. I am covered by my insurance, which is lucky as I've been advised that should they be granted their right to appeal costs could be in the tens of thousands. Well worth people being aware of that at the beginning of the process.
  2. Hello all, Another update. VCS are appealing on the basis of a contract with the landowner being immaterial. I assume that if they win its back to court to present my original defence. I'd assume my original defence would now be strengthened if the VCS contract with the landowner is immaterial. If I'd agreed a contract with anyone it was Excel Parking who have no connection to anyone, and VCS's contract with the landowner is now irrelevant. I'll let you know the outcome of the appeal
  3. Will take a look and pm you if I find out. I assume that anyone who has paid the charge this year for less than 2hrs parking could now take VCS to court to claim back costs
  4. Unfortunately not. The only document VCS sent me was a statement of agreement with the landowner from 2018, stipulating that they were allowed to charge for parking but not the terms of that contract. I had asked for the contract and was going to raise the question of what was stipulated in it, but as HB says someone got there first. The contract is from 2010 and has not been updated but suspect VCS may get onto that before too long. The SoA does not mention Excel Parking and VCS ignored that issue. It was not addressed in court due to the case being dismissed.
  5. Hello all, a final thank you very much for your help. My case was today and it appears that VCS have blitzed the courts over the last couple of weeks with similar cases. Another case for the same car park had managed to get hold of the contract, which stipulated 2 hours free parking so the (very fed up with parking cases) judge was dismissing every case thereafter. A great result. Despite my earlier reservations and the stress and concern I do think I would do this all over again, especially as VCS now owe me costs and travel. For others using the
  6. That's great to know thanks! I'll let you know how I get on if it does go to court (or if VCS drops it)
  7. Seems a very logical approach to me - to make sure that my case is as good as it can be in court I can demonstrate that not only that I sent all relative documents to the claimant, but that they also received them. Not quite a fatal mistake but its best to cover all corners. They on the other hand have sent me nothing. To be fair, with or without recorded delivery, I haven't included the cost of half a day's leave to attend court in my calculations, which along with the above headaches would definitely make initial payment of the 'charge' the best option in this case, and would now
  8. I think I would have been better paying the initial £60 'charge'. A lot of hassle, a lot of worry, a lot of time and a lot of recorded delivery letters. Would have been galling but for peace of mind I know what I'd do next time
  9. Thanks and sorry - my use of the word fine. The letter says 'willing to accept a reduced settlement charge'
  10. This is still dragging on. Last month I received a letter from the courts setting a date in January, but that they had still not received information from VCS who had until mid December to comply. This weekend I received a letter from VCS offering a reduction in fine to £125 rather than £185 and pointing out that the court would look favourably on their gesture as per the Civil Procedure Rules. I have still not received any evidence requested from VCS and suspect that this is a final bluff before the court case is dropped. I won't be paying the r
  11. This is all still dragging on I've received a mediation email today, which I'm going to ignore. The odd thing is that the email states that all parties have agreed to mediation - I have not agreed to this at all. Any idea why this is? Interestingly this is the first reference to excel who are responsible for the car park. Everything previous to this has been from VCS, I assume Simon has finally realised his error but has still yet to provide me with any information that I have requested or a copy of his N180.
  12. Thanks, I send one copy of n180 to the courts, one to Simon and keep one? Defence was on the lines of: 1. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of [motor vehicle]. 2. It is denied that the Claimant has complied with Schedule 4, Protection of Freedoms Act 2012; see paragraph 5.1a. The car park signs are owned by Excel parking. Under CPR 31.14 I have requested evidence of the claimants contract between VCS and the landowner that assigns the right to enter into contracts with the public and make claims in their own name, and proof of planning per
×
×
  • Create New...