Jump to content

southwestram

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    29
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

0 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Yes, I think I've got a little confused by the patchwork of photos used on Google Maps Streetview, with the entry to the airport - the big sign - being from November 21, and the internal Police signs being from July 19. Clearly they, as you said, took over patrolling the entire airport all at once. I'm going back to the airport, this time on foot (no, I'm not going to walk there) I want to carry out a complete survey of the signage. I think it would be useful for myself and others.
  2. I was looking on Google Maps/Streetview, and some of the images date back to 2016/2019/2021. Does anyone recall when VCS were given the rights to operate across the entirity of the access road? Because there are very few 'repeater' signs on the way to the short-stay car park - certainly not the 80 that they currently claim. Some of the signs (back then) read 'Police Monitored', when placed near to the pedestrian crossings, and refer to loading/unloading. They aren't VCS signs. My thoughts are that perhaps their agreement/ Planning permission might not have been updated when their area increased. Is there any information on the Planning Permission at Bristol Airport from previous cases that anyone can recall seeing? Bristol Airport Crossing Signs July 2019 Were Police Enforced.pdf Bristol Airport Crossing Signs July 2019 Were Police Enforced2.pdf
  3. I think the video I shot last night will show the judge that their claim of reflective, prominent signage is pure flannel. I'll leave the SAR up my sleeve. I don't think it's as strong as the evidence I can show them. I'm also going to focus on the fact that I stopped for as little as ten seconds while I put my phone into the hands-free cradle and answered the call, as is shown by the timing of the two charges - the first at 18:17, followed by another one minute later, during which time I had set off, negotiated the roundabout and arrived at the entrance to the drop off point, reciving the second PCN at 18:18 The second charge, backed by a pair of Witness statements is much less of a worry. I assume I will be allowed to show the judge the video of my trip last night? The only email I've sent/received has been to their Data Protection Officer when I made the SAR. Every other correnspondence has been by mail, not by email One would assume that a DPO would be aware of the danger of sharing my email address without permission?
  4. My visit to Bristol Airport went well, and I have decided that my defence will be based on VCS not having installed clear, legible, illuminated or reflective signage along the access road. I have a video which shows signs facing the wrong way, positioned so that they do not reflect, hidden behind other signs and/or obscured by plant growth, or placed too high up to be legible. The video highlights the strong reflectivity of other signage and traffic controlling equipment within the airport. It also, by comparison, shows the signage used by VCS to be non-reflective, even in the few instances where the sign has been placed to face the oncoming traffic. The particular section where charge number one occurred has no adequate signs. There are however three signs. One is placed high up on a post. Assuming it does have a reflective coating, the reflection would then be directed further upwards, and not back towards the driver. The second sign is obscured behind a much larger, (and much more reflective) general road sign on the approach to the roundabout. It is also tucked back into the bushes, and obscured by branches. The third sign is affixed to some railings, and therefore points out at 90 degrees to the driver. It is also therefore not reflective in any useful fashion, as by the time it becomes legible, would be viewable only through the side window. Of course, rain would make it impossible to read through the side window of a car. Plus of course, drivers are discouraged from turning their heads 90 degrees to the road when approaching a roundabout. The other point of my defence refers to the sign at the entrance point of the airport. The Contract "Offer" This sign is big and unmissable. According to VCS, it measures 2m x 1.1m. It is reflective. Unfortunately, it's in a 30mph zone. Assuming that the lettering used on the sign is the same size as that of a car number plate, it must be readable by a driver from a distance of 75 feet. It also contains rather a lot of information. 1. No Stopping 2. £100 Charge if you stop 3. Cameras are used to enforce compliance 4. Details of owner may be sought from DVLA 5. You are entering Private Property 6. Vehicle Control Systems Limited operate this site You are expected to read, understand, analyse, process and agree to a binding contract with VCS, based on the information on that sign. (As well as continuing to drive your car without mounting the pavement or otherwise being distracted.) At 30mph, from a distance of 75 feet, from the point at which time the sign becomes legible, you will be travelling at 44 feet per second. Therefore, you need to enter into a contract with VCS within 1.7 seconds. The Private Parking firms have been involved since 2019 in producing, in consultation with Government, a Code of Practice, instigated due to their shady practices, described as 'designed to extort' by Minister Neil O’Brien, Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Levelling Up, the Union and Constitution. Although the CoP is currently withdrawn while further negotiations are carried out regarding fees and charges, there is no suggestion that the acceptable levels of conduct are under review. Private Parking firms are expected to "include things such as clear signage, surface markings and compulsory grace periods. The Code also bans the use of aggressive and pseudo-legal language that we’ve all seen on those yellow parking slips doctored to look like official Penalty Charge Notices. And there will be no wriggle-room for rogue companies who continue to flout the rules. If they fail to follow this Code, they will effectively be banned from issuing parking charges indefinitely." Expecting a driver to be able to enter into a binding contract within 1.7 seconds can surely not form part of that Code of Practice, and no legitimate company would try to impose such a condition. It should also be remembered that the Contract is not optional. In order to access Bristol Airport, it is compulsory to enter into the contract with VCS. They do not explain which areas are subject to the No Stopping requirement. It cannot possibly mean No Stopping anywhere on the Private Property, or we would face the prospect of hundreds of people hurling themselves from moving vehicles, together with their suitcases. Of course, I'm being facetious, but unless there is an imposition of a blanket No Stopping zone, it should state where the No Stopping Zone begins and ends. In short, it needs to state that this applies only to the access road. The various car parks, where stopping is permitted have separate rules and requirements, and that needs to be made clear. The sign also states that vehicle details may be sought from DVLA, but it doesn't state under which circumstances, and that would be a vital consideration before a contract could be accepted and entered into The Code of Practice also points out the sketchy practice of making a Parking Charge 'doctored to look like official Penalty Charge Notices.', and yet the icon used on the main entrance sign is exactly that. VCS display their true colours in their actions at Bristol Airport, chasing round after drivers on the access roads, waiting for a moment of confusion, or a stop under mitigating circumstances, and then issuing a hugely overpriced invoice - its appearance mimicking a Penalty Charge Notice, in the hope that the motorist will be scared by their threat of Court Action and CCJs into paying their - in the words of the Minister - extortionate fees. Plus their illegal add-ons for 'debt collection costs'. Illegal because they never formed a part of the Contract In the Ministerial Foreword, it clearly states that rogue companies that continue to flout the rules, and fail to comply with the Code of Practice will be prevented from carrying out their business. Clearly, until the Code of Practice comes out of its current hiatus, VCS are continuing to extort money from the motorist.
  5. Both AoS done, and pdfs saved to my laptop Both CPR requests transposed and completed, ready for printing and posting tomorrow. I'm shortly leaving the house to drive to Bristol Airport to video the signage, and highlight how bloody diffcult it is to see it when it's facing outwards onto the road, and not along the road towards the oncoming driver. I'm also of the opinion that the use of a mobile phone whilst driving is not permitted on the airport feeder road as it comes under the Highways Act, and therefore the Highway Code which says; You can get 6 penalty points and a £200 fine if you hold and use a phone, sat nav, tablet, or any device that can send and receive data while driving or riding a motorcycle. I have a Witness Statement from our taxi controller, stating that only in extreme circumstances would she phone a driver. It would be fair for me to assume that there had been a problem with the previous customer - that perhaps they had left something in the car. It would be impracticable to leave the airport to find a place where stopping is permitted, call the office, return to the airport, drive to the drop-off car park and then meet up with the customer. Also, at no point did I cause an obstruction or prevent any vehicle from passing mine. Furthermore, as shown by the issuance of the SECOND PCN, it can be proven that I had stopped for far less than one minute - the first PCN being issued at 18:17, the second at 18:18, a period of one minute apart, which must have included the time needed to drive to the roundabout, go around the roundabout and return to the drop-off car park entrance where I successfully avoided murdering the second passenger.
  6. I wondered whether not including anything in the file for the first PCN Subject Access Request response might be a bit of a technical faux pas, and (hopefully) not then a claim that they could continue with?
  7. I hadn't filed the AOS - waiting for a response from you guys before I did something wrong, but had noted that on another topic, the defendant had been recommended to use the MCOL route, and figured I would be better doing that than trying to organise myself into buying envelopes and stamps etc. I will file the AoS for both charges right now, and send off a CPR request to ELMS this evening. Thanks
  8. Which Court have you received the claim from ? MCOL Northampton NN1 ? Manual Claim CCMCC (Salford) ? New beta WWW.MONEYCLAIMS.SERVICE.GOV.UK ? If possible please scan redact and upload a full page copy of page 1 of the claim form. (not the response page or AOS) Name of the Claimant : Claimants Solicitors: ELMS LEGAL LTD Date of issue – 26 JULY 2022 Date for AOS - 13th AUGUST 2022 Date to submit Defence - 26th AUGUST 2022 What is the claim for – The claim is for a breach of contract for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. The defendant's vehicle XXXXXXX was identified in the Bristol Airport on the 01/02/2022 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely, stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited. At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. The Terms and Conditions upon entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations. The sign was the offer, and the act of entering private land was acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply, anmely a parking charge notice will be issued and the defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest. What is the value of the claim? Amount Claimed 170.00 court fees 35.00 legal rep fees 50.00 Total Amount 265.00
  9. Which Court have you received the claim from ? MCOL Northampton NN1 ? Manual Claim CCMCC (Salford) ? New beta WWW.MONEYCLAIMS.SERVICE.GOV.UK ? If possible please scan redact and upload a full page copy of page 1 of the claim form. (not the response page or AOS) Name of the Claimant : Claimants Solicitors: ELMS LEGAL LTD Date of issue – 26 JULY 2022 Date for AOS - 13th AUGUST 2022 Date to submit Defence - 26th AUGUST 2022 What is the claim for – The claim is for a breach of contract for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. The defendant's vehicle XXXXXXX was identified in the Bristol Airport on the 01/02/2022 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely, stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited. At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. The Terms and Conditions upon entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations. The sign was the offer, and the act of entering private land was acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply, anmely a parking charge notice will be issued and the defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest. What is the value of the claim? Amount Claimed 170.00 court fees 35.00 legal rep fees 50.00 Total Amount 265.00
  10. I would like to go to court, but would prefer the case to be heard much closer to home as I live in the Southwest of England. How would I go about having the case moved here?
  11. I would like to go to court, but would prefer the case to be heard much closer to home as I live in the Southwest of England. How would I go about having the case moved here?
  12. I have now created two new topics for this, one for each PCN issued, as obviously, the defence would be different in each case, and as suggested, it would be better to keep them separate
  13. I have now received, in order of receipt 1. The company received a NTK dated 4th Feb 2022 providing details of their allegation of stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited. The time of the alleged offence is 18:18pm on 1st Feb 2022. - ONE MINUTE AFTER CHARGE NUMBER ONE The company responded, providing my name and address as the driver of their vehicle 2. VCS then sent me a CHARGE NOTICE (NTD) dated 17th February asking for £100, reduced to £60 if paid early. I wrote an appeal letter dated 8th March 2022, stamped as received by VCS 9th March 2022, explaining that I stopped to avoid driving my car into the intended passenger, who was running down the entrance ramp to the drop off car park. To have continued would have caused an accident. While I was trying to explain that I needed to pick him up from within the car park, his fellow passengers opened the boot hatch and threw in their bags. They all got into the taxi and we drove off. The passenger, a doctor, has already provided me with a Witness Statement via email, confirming what I said in my appeal letter. I also enclosed a photo of the parking receipt for the drop-off car park (receipt issued 18:14). 3. VCS replied to me on the 24th March 2022, rejecting the appeal. In their rejection, they state that their reflective signage is 'positioned to face oncoming vehicles'. This is not the case, as signage is affixed to the railings facing out onto the road, and not legible until alongside the sign, thereby nullifying the reflective nature of the sign. Note that I was on the feeder road at 18:18pm on a February evening). I believe the signs would be legible only if they were erected onto posts to face oncoming drivers. In any event, deliberately driving into a pedestrian is illegal, even if it avoids stopping in a no stopping zone! 4. On the 26th of April 2022, VCS sent me a DEMAND FOR PAYMENT letter. The amount they claim had risen to £170, the additional costs for 'debt collection' and the opportunity to pay a 'reduced amount' had now lapsed. 5. On the 18th May, VCS sent a FINAL DEMAND letter 6. On the 24th of May, VCS sent a LETTER BEFORE CLAIM for £170, plus a warning that court fees of £35 and interest would be added. I made a Subject Access Request on the 21st June Please supply the data about me that I am entitled to under data protection law relating to myself. Specifically: - ALL photos taken - all letters/emails sent and received, including any appeal correspondence earlier - all data held, all evidence that you will rely on, and a full copy of the PCN, NTK - and a list of all PCNs outstanding against this VRN, Any claim must be for all PCNs, not several separate claims. If you need any more data from me to confirm my identity please let me know as soon as possible. It may be helpful for you to know that data protection law requires you to respond to a request for data within one calendar month. If you do not normally deal with these requests, please pass this letter to your Data Protection Officer, or relevant staff member. If you need advice on dealing with this request, the Information Commissioner’s Office can assist you. Its website is ico.org.uk or it can be contacted on 0303 123 1113. I am seeking debt advice but I deny any debt and the case must be put 'on hold' for not less than 30 days under the PAP for debt claims 2017. Please forward a copy of this email to your Legal Department [email protected] as a matter of urgency. Yours faithfully To which they replied on 7th July Dear Sir With reference to your request for a copy of your personal data held on our system in-line with GDPR legislation; please find attached a copy of the information held. Photographic evidence and data is held on file in accordance with the Data Protection Act 2018 and is used for the sole purpose of pursuing settlement of a Parking Charge. We comply with the requirements of the Data Protection Act 2018 and the General Data Protection Regulations to uphold your rights to Privacy. Our Privacy Notice gives clear reasons for why, from where, and how we obtain and use your Personal Data, under what circumstances we may retain and share your data with third parties and for how long that data may be retained. Please refer to: http://www.vehiclecontrolservices.co.uk and follow the links for our Privacy Notices in respect of any questions you may have and your rights in respect of your data. The information sent is contained in a PDF document and/or zip file. It is your responsibility to ensure that you are able to both receive and open the files and to check your spam/junk folders at regular intervals, in case the attachment(s) has been filtered out by your mail server. Yours Sincerely 7 On the 24th June, ELMS legal sent me a NOTIFICATION OF INSTRUCTION in which they state that there is now an unpaid PARKING Charge Notice (PCN) 8. I was issued with a County Court Claim Form on the 27th July from the Northampton County Court I have replied, using the Acknowledgement of Service form, stating that I intend to defend all of this claim, and on the Defence Form, I have ticked the box stating that I dispute the full amount How best to state my defence?
  14. I have now received, in order of receipt 1. The company received a NTK dated 4th Feb 2022 providing details of their allegation of stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited. The time of the alleged offence is 18:17pm on 1st Feb 2022. The company responded, providing my name and address as the driver of their vehicle 2. VCS then sent me a CHARGE NOTICE (NTD) dated 17th February asking for £100, reduced to £60 if paid early. I wrote an appeal letter dated 8th March 2022, stamped as received by VCS 9th March 2022, explaining that I stopped to receive an urgent call from the office (the controller would never otherwise phone a driver) I also enclosed a photo of the parking receipt for the drop-off car park (receipt issued 18:14). 3. VCS replied to me on the 24th March 2022, rejecting the appeal. In their rejection, they state that their reflective signage is 'positioned to face oncoming vehicles'. This is not the case, as signage is affixed to the railings facing out onto the road, and not legible until alongside the sign, thereby nullifying the reflective nature of the sign. Note that I was on the feeder road at 18:17pm on a February evening). I believe the signs would be legible only if they were erected onto posts to face oncoming drivers. 4. On the 26th of April 2022, VCS sent me a DEMAND FOR PAYMENT letter. The amount they claim had risen to £170, the additional costs for 'debt collection' and the opportunity to pay a 'reduced amount' had now lapsed. 5. On the 18th May, VCS sent a FINAL DEMAND letter 6. On the 24th of May, VCS sent a LETTER BEFORE CLAIM for £170, plus a warning that court fees of £35 and interest would be added. I made a Subject Access Request on the 21st June Please supply the data about me that I am entitled to under data protection law relating to myself. Specifically: - ALL photos taken - all letters/emails sent and received, including any appeal correspondence earlier - all data held, all evidence that you will rely on, and a full copy of the PCN, NTK - and a list of all PCNs outstanding against this VRN, Any claim must be for all PCNs, not several separate claims. If you need any more data from me to confirm my identity please let me know as soon as possible. It may be helpful for you to know that data protection law requires you to respond to a request for data within one calendar month. If you do not normally deal with these requests, please pass this letter to your Data Protection Officer, or relevant staff member. If you need advice on dealing with this request, the Information Commissioner’s Office can assist you. Its website is ico.org.uk or it can be contacted on 0303 123 1113. I am seeking debt advice but I deny any debt and the case must be put 'on hold' for not less than 30 days under the PAP for debt claims 2017. Please forward a copy of this email to your Legal Department [email protected] as a matter of urgency. Yours faithfully To which they replied on 7th July Dear Sir With reference to your request for a copy of your personal data held on our system in-line with GDPR legislation; please find attached a copy of the information held. Photographic evidence and data is held on file in accordance with the Data Protection Act 2018 and is used for the sole purpose of pursuing settlement of a Parking Charge. We comply with the requirements of the Data Protection Act 2018 and the General Data Protection Regulations to uphold your rights to Privacy. Our Privacy Notice gives clear reasons for why, from where, and how we obtain and use your Personal Data, under what circumstances we may retain and share your data with third parties and for how long that data may be retained. Please refer to: http://www.vehiclecontrolservices.co.uk and follow the links for our Privacy Notices in respect of any questions you may have and your rights in respect of your data. The information sent is contained in a PDF document and/or zip file. It is your responsibility to ensure that you are able to both receive and open the files and to check your spam/junk folders at regular intervals, in case the attachment(s) has been filtered out by your mail server. Yours Sincerely However, the folder on the Zip File relating to this charge is empty. All of the information provided refers only to the other PCN issued. 7 On the 24th June, ELMS legal sent me a NOTIFICATION OF INSTRUCTION in which they state that there is now an unpaid PARKING Charge Notice (PCN) 8. I was issued with a County Court Claim Form on the 27th July from the Northampton County Court I have replied, using the Acknowledgement of Service form, stating that I intend to defend all of this claim, and on the Defence Form, I have ticked the box stating that I dispute the full amount How best to state my defence?
  15. There were two allegations of having stopped on the airport feeder road. There was supposition yesterday when only the court letter for the first event arrived, that they had dropped the second prosecution as it involved me having stopped to avoid knocking down someone running down the ramp I was trying to access. However, the court letter for that one arrived today, a day after the first.
×
×
  • Create New...