Jump to content


VCS/BW PCN Nov 2014 - St Andrews Retail Park -- found CCJ served to old address


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2280 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

so WS not due till Friday 26th jan by 4pm

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 251
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

NO, that is why they have discontinued.

 

all of this was made clear well before the set aside application was put in and again when you kept confusing the different processes.

 

You have got your life back for £255, be happy with that.

If your partner is really aggrieved she can sue the for breach of the DPA but to be honest I wouildnt recommend you go there as that requires more effort and understanding

 

However,

I would contract the court to make sure that they have told them of the discontinuance otherwise you carry on as though you are going to a hearing in feb.

If they have "forgot" to tell the court then you stand a chance of getting a costs order

Edited by honeybee13
Paras
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes that's correct dx, but there has been another development. My partner has received an email from VCS with a Notice Of Discontinuance. Can we now recover the costs of the Set Aside or any other costs?

 

Typical... Though I'm surprised that they didn't leave it until the 11th hour like they usually do.

 

I'd do a little 'outline' work on your Witness Statement anyway, and because of the time of year, I'd leave it until the court reopens in the new year and check with them that the case really has been discontinued. It's not unheard of for the likes of VCS to send a keeper a notice of discontinuance, forget to tell the court and then win another default judgement because no one turns up to defend it.

 

If they have discontinued, I believe that you're going to have to bear the cost of the set aside (doesn't really seem fair, but there you go) unless you now make a claim against them to recover all of your costs. Your partner (as keeper) might also have a valid claim against VCS for misuse of their personal data.

 

I'd ponder that over the Christmas period.

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pagemaster it would be great for your other half to get the CCJ removed quickly if they do not continue.

I know EB suggested not to go to Court to reclaim your costs but there might be another way.

 

Threaten them with Court.

Your partner has been put to some difficulty with the mortgage because of the unwarranted CCJ.

You are considerably out of pocket as a result of a parking ticket that was unmerited and they [VCS ]knew it was unmerited

[as a result of many other defended cases they have lost]

 

they continued with you only because they heard nothing from you, not because they had a strong case.

Silence is not an admission of guilt.

 

They know how many cases they have lost and they knew the flaws in their case against you.

[if they don't they are not fit and proper persons to possess a Consumer licence].

 

Did you find out whether they had permission from the Council to erect their notices in the car park?

Without permission VCS committed a criminal offence which means straight away that their parking signs are illegal and cannot form a contract with any motorist. They would know if they had that permission and most parking companies do not apply for it.

 

Did they charge you more than the stated maximum stated amount on their notices [not including Court costs and interest which are allowable].

If they used a DCA to write to your partner they often add £60 or so for that which as you know is not allowed under POFA and that should negate their claim.

 

So along with any other reasons you have found, they had no realistic chance of winning this ticket in Court. In spite of them knowing all this they still went for it putting your partner through unnecessary stress and costs not to mention breaching the Data Protection Act.

 

All of these factors mean that you consider you have a very strong case against them and you feel confident that any Court would reimburse your costs for their unreasonable behaviour on what would have been a lost cause for them had you been represented in Court.

 

Point out that their solicitors costs plus yours plus the Set aside fee, plus trashing your partners credit worthiness plus £250 at least for breaching the DPA will come to a considerable cost. Not to mention the field day that the newspapers would have and encouraging other motorists to challenge your parking tickets in future.

 

I leave it up to your own good judgement how much you would settle for with them to avoid them losing in Court but am amount not unadjacent to the £255 would do for a start. If they don't agree, send in the DCAs and add £60 to the bill.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, thank you for your very details reply lookingforinfo. I haven't yet checked to see if their signs have planning permission but I will do that.

 

I think the idea of threatening them with court is a very good idea and I will look into this further.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I did touch upon that but with the OP's lack of understanding of what has happened and what was needed so far I felt that it wasnt something they should do..

 

Do I think they have a good claim?

Yes but as there have been relatively few claims under Vidal Hall v Google and even VCS v Philip is only persuasive getting everything right is an absolute must and I dont really think it is our position to apply time to such a claim other than offering general advice.

 

The OP may want to contact the British Motorists Protection association and ask whether they will help with the VCS V philip and other cases as far as transcripts etc go as they have a good library where we dont. If they can help then the OP can always come back here for a farly immediate opinion on waht they are doing

 

The signs wont have PP, they will claim that they are "deemed consent" by virtue of their size and ignore the content issue that makes then require consent, even though this is free and basically on the nod. See the parking pranksters recent blog on a retired lawyers reseach into this.

Edited by honeybee13
Paras
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's our first draft of the WS. I hope we're getting this right:-

 

Witness Statement – Name – Case number

 

1 There is no locus standi due to no contract with landowner that assigns any rights to enter into contracts and make civil claims in their own name

 

2 There is no cause for action against defendant as there is no keeper liability. The driver of the vehicle must be identified. POFA Sect 5,6,7,8,9. Therefore VCS haven’t legally issued an invoice and therefore not created a keeper liability either.

 

3 No contract formed by signage so no breach of contract can occur.

POFA requires that a complete address be visible on the signs, not just a PO box.

 

Also there is no creditor listed on the signs and therefore no contract according to the POFA.

 

There is no planning permission for the signage which is contrary to planning regulations, and therefore the signs are illegal. The whole contract can be rejected under S 62 of the Consumer Contracts Regulations.

 

4. The £54 fee added for ‘contractual costs’ is not allowable and therefore the whole claim fails.

 

We'll have to post this today or tomorrow probably so I'm hoping you guys can help again.

 

MOJ issues investigation and say any default judgment whom no knowledge by defendant will be removed, look out for updates

 

 

 

/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ebt-judgement-

 

Thank you Old Cogger, here is the amended link:-

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5214075/Action-debt-judgement-rogue-firms-abuse-announced.html

 

:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

that's not a witness statement

its a defence.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, sorry dx, the wording from the court is as follows:-

 

"Defendant to file and serve defence by 5th January 2018."

 

"Each party must deliver to the other party and to the court office both the statements of all witnesses whom the party intends to call to give evidence (including their own evidence) and copies of all documents on which that party intends to rely at the hearing no later than 14 days before the hearing. The original documents must be brought to the hearing."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I hope this witness statement isn't to brief:-

 

: I, xxxxxx of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, being the Defendant in this case will state as follows;

 

. I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim which is due to be heard on 12 February 2018 at Hull County Court.

2. The matters set out below are within my own knowledge, except where I indicate to the contrary.

3. I believe that the claimant has not created a valid contract and therefore there is no case to answer.

 

I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true.

Signed…………………………………

Dated…………………………………..

Link to post
Share on other sites

slow down

you're doing it again

rushing off like a headless chicken in the wrong direction...

 

your WS is not due till Friday 26th JAN by 4pm.

 

its your defence that's the one that needs doing

and

I wouldn't be opening up all those subjects in it just yet..

 

unless EB thinks by listing all the problems, it might just make BW runaway?

 

IMHO filing anything bar the std 2 line BW defence [which must be here numerous times already..:lol:]

 

is the way to go.

 

unless the original claimform POC is different to those filed by BW before?

that the 2 line defence relates too?

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

urh?

why do you need to do that?

 

you indicated earlier that BW have discontinued..

discontinued what

the original claim?

or

any objection to the set aside

 

post up how and what BW sent and by which method

informing you of the disc'd

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have searched this forum for "2 line defence", "two line defence" and a few other variations. There are a lot of mentions of the 2 line defence but I only found one possible answer to the mytsery of the 2 line defence as follows:-

 

"no contract was offered by VCS by way of signage where you parked

so there cannot be a breach to cause a claim to be made"

 

Could somebody confirm for future users of this forum that this is in fact the 2 line defence that people are talking about on this fourm?

 

Thanks in advance. :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

is the court open today go ring them and ask

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

is the court open today go ring them and ask

 

I rang the council about the VCS signs and whether they have permission to put the signs up. Although the planning dept is closed over Christmas nobody could confirm whether they would need planning permission for signs on private land. I'll have to ring back next week.I think it will be worth a phone call for future reference in any case.

 

I also managed to get through to the Hull County court who confirmed that the date had been vacated and the case has been discontinued. They are confirming this in writing today so we should get the letter sometime next week.

 

We were advised on this forum to proceed with our defence and WS until such time as the court confirmed the discontinuance.

 

Our remaining option is to threaten them with court as advised earlier by lookinforinfo, so I would appreciate any further comments on this option.

Link to post
Share on other sites

case over you won

nothing more for you to do.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Planning, and advertising consent is pretty complex. So your average bod at the council wouldn't have a scooby. You'll probably have to try quite hard to find someone in the planning department that fully understands it to be honest :roll:

 

At least now the court has confirmed that VCS have discontinued, so at least you've not get that to think about.

 

 

What I will say is, don't threaten to start proceedings against VCS unless you're fully prepared to follow through on your threat. Lots of people (parking companies included) threaten court and then don't follow it through.

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

claim against you is discontinued so you have nothing else to do or worry about.

 

dont start another fight because you really dont understand things well enough,

be glad for what you have achieved.

 

No need to write a defence, witness statements or anything else, they are now redundant.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for your replies.

 

I can see that if we were to take this further we would need to use a solicitor and therefore we are looking in to this idea.

 

I doubt there is a 'no win no fee' option but it's worth investigating either way.

 

Can someone tell me what the 2 line defence is please?

 

I still haven't found it on this forum.

 

Thanks in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

not worth it

you'd never get the fees back and a very slim chance of a win.

 

all for £255?

 

the defence is already pointed too here several times

the first being post 37

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...