VCS PCN Doncaster airport restricted bus stop/stand

[marrcoss]

Hello,

 

Probably as most of the people here I feel like I've been heavily fined for minor offence.

 

 

As mentioned in the Title I'd been issued a PCN for 'Parking on a restricted bus stop/stand'.

The most important question for me now is whether I should pay full amount (£154) or take it to the court.

I don't know if I have the case here and whether it is worth risking for that kind of money.

 

Also the way I dealt with it up to now was probably not too good

and on top of it I'm not British which makes it even more difficult

for me to understand all these legal procedures.

 

here is the story:

 

1. On 02/04/2015, 22:15 at Doncaster airport I stopped in the bus bay.

It's located just outside the fenced carpark but apparently is still within airport premises.

I guess it might have been ca.30s and to be honest I don't remember why I stopped.

 

 

As I had a kid with me and just picked up my parents from the airport it might have been some safety issue

(not fastened seatbelts) or just simply to set the sat nav.

I'm not from the area and didn't exactly know which way to go meaning

I had to stop somewhere and that bay seemed to be the safest place there.

 

2. I received a PCN on 20/05/2015 with a £60 discounted rate.

 

3. I appealed (in my own way, not too professional and legal manner

- unfortunately I confirmed in my letter that I did stop in that bay

and tried to explain the circumstances.) and obviously it was rejected

on 06/06/2015 having found no extenuating circumstances.

 

 

Still could have paid £60 but decided to appeal to IAS as suggested in the letter.

 

4. I went to IAS webpage but there was no option suitable to my case so I just left it.

 

5. I've received a letter on 13/04/2016 from VCS that the case had been moved to legal department:

BW Legal and should pay the outstanding balance (£154) or it will be taken to Court

 

They threaten me with CCJ, affecting my credit score and employability.

 

Any suggestions welcomed.

Personally I'm leaning towards paying the penalty and getting it off my head.

£154 is not a fortune.

[armadillo71]

So one letter ten months after the rejected appeal and you are willing to pay a toothless debt collector £154... ?

 

Please read the recent threads on this forum.

[marrcoss]

I'm not but I started with £60, now it's £154

and I just don't want to find myself paying £500 at the end.

 

 

There is so much legal stuff here and different cases that it will take me weeks to go through it

and at the end I won't exactly similar one.

 

 

I know that it took long but unfortunately I was advised by people to just leave it as THEY would not take me to court.

Now I'm not sure about it....

[dx100uk]

doesn't say WILL anything read the letter properly.

 

 

its not a fine

nor is it a penalty

its a speculative invoice.

 

 

https://cse.google.co.uk/cse?cx=partner-pub-0964707606882478:652l7hswbgv&ie=UTF-8&q=BW+legal+PCN&sa=Search+CAG#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=BW%20legal%20PCN&gsc.page=1

[themagician]

wish they would read their begging letters properly.

[silverfox1961]

Hi and welcome to CAG.

 

Before we go too much further, we need the proper name on the parking company as there is no VCN. Chances are this is VCS who are members of the IPC and therefore part of the IAS.

 

It was pointless appealing to the IAS anyway as they would have rejected you as they are biased and the adjudicators seem to not have a complete grasp of the law.

 

BW Legal used to be the main solicitor group used by a debt collection firm, Lowell but since they have started using their own, BWL are now scraping the barrel taking on these cases.

The letters will say 'may', 'might' and 'could'

If the parking company did take action, there is no guarantee they would win as you would have got all your evidence together beforehand.

 

Did you see any signs? Was this at night?

I will see what I can find out about Doncaster airport.

[silverfox1961]

Although this blog is over two years old, I would imagine the by laws of the airport would still be in place.

 

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/prankster-operator-guide-to-winning-at.html

[marrcoss]

themagician said:

wish they would read their begging letters properly.

 

No disrespect for you but I thought this is the place you get a piece of advice not criticism only..... Move out from UK and then try to appeal in French or Chinese and then we can discuss.... It's not easy, believe me...

 

Answering your questions:

VCN is Vehicle Control Services Ltd and they claim to be a member of IPC.

 

I don't know who operates the car park at this airport but the penalty was given for 'allegedly breaching the terms and conditions of use of the Privately Operated Access Roads at Robin Hood Airport, Approach Roads and the Reason for contravention was: Parked on a restricted bus stop/stand. It all happened outside of the fenced airport car park, literally 20m beyond the gates.

 

I know that there are a lot of 'might', 'could', 'may' but still I have got no clue that we take it to court I've got any chance of winning?? As said I don't want to find myself in the situation that the bill will raise from £60 to £500 at the end.

 

When I stopped there at night (22:15) I didn't notice any signs but if you use the street view you will be able to see a small sign saying most likely: No stopping at all times. It's a bit blurry but it definitely says something like that.

 

Thanks for your response

[silverfox1961]

As you haven't followed the full appeals process, I feel it would be pointless to contact anyone now.

 

Your alleged 'bill' will not go up to £500 as if they tried court action, all they could claim would be for the ticket, court fee and solicitor costs which are fixed in the small claims court.

 

In the past 4 months (from checking) VCS have taken the vast amount of 6 cases to court. No idea if they were won or lost.

 

As this was at night and headlamps generally don't look upwards, how are you meant to see the signs?

 

The land is owned by the Peel Group and they will have a contract with VCS for parking management. This means nothing to you. Generally, even in daylight you would need to stop to read the signs as they are not big enough to read (and dangerous too) whilst driving.

 

Try not to stress too much. VCS don't do court very often and as such, I would suggest you continue ignoring unless a Letter Before Action or court papers arrive

[marrcoss]

So I understand that if we take it to court I stand a chance of winning?? I can see now that probably the whole point of not allowing you to stop anywhere near the car park is to make people use it (pay for it) and prevent quick drop off / pick up outside of it. That wouldn't be the case here as I have used it however I don't have a ticket as a proof now. I don't know if the genuine reason (emergency) to stop the car is good enough to dismiss their claim in the court??

Do you think I should contact BW Legal and try to explain this again as they have suggested this in their letter??

[silverfox1961]

No point whatsoever in contacting BW as they follow instruction from VCS which is 'get them to pay' No if's no maybe's nothing. They just won't be interested

[dx100uk]

02/04/2015

its a year since your 'offence'

 

 

simply ignore until/unless you get a letter before action

or

claimform.

 

 

then its easy to defend on land ownership

signs & planning permission

and all the other stupid reasons

[ericsbrother]

Airport is not "relevant land" so PoFA not applicable and that means

that as the keeper of the vehicle you have no liability whatsoever

 

 

However, you seen to have identified yourself as the driver so it is down to lawfulness of contract

That is where they fall down.

 

 

BW are acting as a debt collector, paid by VCS to scare you into paying.

BW, being dishonest have added a small fortune to the amount calimed

because they think you will be scared into apying so why not

- make it £500 and you wouldnt even consider paying so just enough to make it worthwhile

and make you think it legit.

 

Back to the alleged infringement.

VCS are an absolute shower when it comes to things like this

and lose court cases that are defended for a very large number of reasons.

 

 

The main one in your case is they have NO RIGHT to make a claim in the first place.

 

So, what to do?

If you feel you must say something jsut write a brief letter saying that

"any debt to your client is denied for a number of reasons and any claim by them is thus vex

and will be vigourously defended as such"

 

 

You probably wont hear any more about it but if you do get a lba

then come back here for wording of a suitable response.

[marrcoss]

I don't have too,

I just felt it would be worth but was told a post before that it's not necessary

and should just wait for LBA or claimform.

 

 

As I mentioned in my first post I'm not native British thus it's not easy for me to form a formal response

which would have any meaning and value in terms of legal proceedings.

 

 

If you think that kind of short statement might cut this out then I'm more then happy to send it.

 

 

If that statement requires a bit more I'd really appreciate any help with that.

 

 

Thanks anyway for your comment.

[ericsbrother]

just the words inside the quotation marks will do, no need to add anything else at this stage.

No guarantee that this will be the end of it but it creates a paper trail that shows that you are not burying your head in the sand so they are less likely to want to start something.

[RichardM]

@Marrcoss - relax and take a deep breath. Nothing is likely to happen.

 

VCS are very well known for this method of operation and for the tickets that they issue.

 

They operate the same in John Lennon Airport in Liverpool, also owned by the Peel Group and issue thousands of tickets each year to unsuspecting motorists like yourself. They want everyone to use their car parks to drop off people, where everyone has to pay for the privilige of parking for a couple of minutes. So they made up these silly rules that nobody could stop on the approach roads to set down or pick up passengers, and that if they did, they would be liable to pay heavily as a breach of contract, that the driver was alleged to have entered into when they drove past signs.

 

The only problem they have is that

a) nobody can read the signs doing 30 mph and therefore can never have entered into a contract

b) they have no idea who the driver is, and have no right to hold the registered keeper to court, because the rules for parking and traffic are covered by bye-laws, and nowhere in them does it say the registered keeper can be held liable. Even if they wanted to have you charged for a breach of bye-laws they can't. That has to be done within six months, and they wouldn't see a penny.

 

Of course, VCS do not want you to know this, so they lie through their teeth and try to make out that they have every right to impose their own regulations. THEY DON'T. They have recently even tried to claim that the approach roads are treated as car parks for their purposes and you are not allowed to stop in them. Ever heard of a car park that you can't park in and has no markings? No, didn't think so.

 

Despite the thousands of PCN's that they have issued at both John Lennon and Doncaster, not one has ever reached court to my knowledge. In fact, there are discussions ongoing on how to FORCE VCS to take one of these to court, because doing so would almost certainly expose the fraudulent behaviour that they are pulling in collusion with the owners of the airport.

 

In the meantime, you can freely ignore anything other than begging letters from the debt collectors, because that's all they are, begging letters for money that they are not entitled to and have no right to ask for.

[marrcoss]

Thanks a lot, these will really make my bank holiday weekend chilled out.

[marrcoss]

Hello again,

 

I've just received 'Letter of claim' from BW Legal who works for VCS.

 

 

They asking again either a payment or providing detailed grounds for disputing.

 

 

As advised here I have just written to them a short response

("any debt to your client is denied for a number of reasons

and any claim by them is thus vex and will be vigourously defended as such")

 

 

they have actually confirmed that my position has been noted

and they will look for further instructions from their client.

 

 

Obviously they have decided to move forward with it hence this 'Letter of claim'.

 

They are asking now to pay £237

which includes principal debt + initial legal costs, estimated interest, court fees and solicitors costs.

 

 

They mentioned about County Court proceedings and threaten me again

about their client obtaining County Court Judgement against me which will be recorded on my credit file etc.....

 

I guess I should stick to my previous statement

and respond to this letter in exactly same way I did last time?

 

Thanks for any help.

[dx100uk]

type in PCN BW in the search CAG box of the red top toolbar

 

 

100's already here to read

 

 

dx

[zydeco]

"letter of claim" is just a letter claiming you owe them money dressed up.

It's not a letter before claim/action.

[ericsbrother]

They know that if their client goes to court they will lose so they try and frighten you into paying up by ramping it up with added costs. They wouldnt get these even if they won at court so it is just money for nothing and possibly "Champerty and maintenance" unless they are kind enough to hand over their invoices and bank statements as part of the evidence pack.

Personally I would ignore this latest threat beacuse they know that you have already created a paper trail and they know their client doesnt stand a chance of winning a defended claim so they are fishing to find out what you know and hiope to trip you up with your own words.

[marrcoss]

Thanks guys,

 

I shall then send a letter where I will confirm my position as per my previous response.

 

I hope, I really do hope they will not take it to court.

[honeybee13]

marcross, ericsbrother who is very knowledgeable has suggested that you don't write.

 

I'm not sure why you want to stir things up with VCS?

 

HB

[marrcoss]

You are right, he did said that. Somehow I got suggested by previous answers that I should respond to their letters at least with a simple statement.

 

I will leave it then without any response now. We'll see what will happen.

 

Thanks again.

[ericsbrother]

as long as you sent a denial of liability letter suggested a while back there is no point entering into any further correspondence.

 

Ultimately it is not up to you whether VCS or anyone else decides to throw money at a legal claim and if they do it will be relatively easy to defeat it for a number of reasons.

 

My only annoyance at the civil legal system is that once they have failed to show a cause for action they are not barred from trying it on with some other poor souls.

 

It would be tempting to try and get them to sue someone half a dozen times and then get them classed as vexatious litigants of eternity.