Jump to content


Justice143

VCS ANPR PCN Claimform - overstay St Marys Gate, retail park, Sheffield **WON+COSTS**

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 276 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Tagging @Blind7383 Above

 

Yes I realised that. My answer was to help you in your defence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

snet some comments in respnse to a private email, please post up your revised WS, I sure there is a lot more you can add when you ahve looked at relevant cases on the parking pranksters blogspot.

 

whe yu quote the as being relevant or persuasive you copy the entire blog for your evidence bundle so in your WS you can just refer to "parking co v Bloggs 2014" for example. you MUST include your reference material and pictures in your bundle but they dont have to be rewritten into your WS as long as you index them so it is easy for the judge to refer to the correct add on at the time. They arent realy interested in the content of say a court report, they wnat to see that you have soemthing to support what you say, they probably know about what you raise alresdy if they are diligent and if they arent then you have what you need to persuade them rather tha just a vague reference that they arent going to look up as that may be seen as leaning too far towards helping you.

Edited by honeybee13
Paras

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know I need to number each paragraph. What are your thoughts guys. I think I now need to read back through their ws and see what else jumps out. I'm reading the POFA act but my brain is not processing the meaning of half of it. Not sure i'm cut out for this and feeling the pressure to get it all referenced with examples of previous cases and printed. Main difficulty is logging on to doitafeter work, kids, lack of sleep. Get the violins out. Went to the courts personal help unit today and was advised by them to put that I had had some third party advice on my witness statement. When I say "them" they were very young, guessing volunteers" the manager wasn't there.

 

 

Do I need to add anything to support my original defence?

I am the defendant in this case and these facts

 

The defendant was not the driver at the time and the claimant does not rely upon the Protection of Freedoms act (POFA) 2012 to create a keeper liability in this matter so the defendant puts it to STRICT PROOF as to who was driving at the time.

 

 

The claimant has failed to show a cause for action by NOT responding to a CPR 31.14 request for documents and state that you think the claim should be summarily dismissed under CPR 16.4(4)

 

 

The contract for parking is for customers only and as patrons of the theatre can never be offered the terms without the certainly that they will be breached, the signage represents an unfair contract under s62 of the Consumer Rights Act.

 

Do I need to insert this section of the customer rights act here?

 

Since the event of the 24th October 2017 a system has been put in place for customers of the theatre to enter their registration numbers allowing them free parking during a performance.

 

(Have pictures of the machine that you input you reg into

the email from Moor Management/LLS

 

(Refer to ticket and times of parking which correlates to the show)

 

At the time of the show there were no notifications in the theatre nor outside or on the theatres website stating that theatre user should not park us the car park that the theatre is sited.

 

 

The signage at the entrance to the car park is especially unclear ” as it is situated on the left hand side at an angle and can not be seen from the inside of a vehicle.

See photographs

 

I have also included photographs of the two neighbouring car parks for comparison which highlights how poor the VCS sign is.

 

In any case the signage is inadequate as it is so poorly sited and as it is not illuminated that it cannot be really be said it is brought to the attention of the drivers of vehicles entering the site at night.

See my pictures

 

 

I now make reference to the The POFA 2012 (Copy supplied) which is the relevant law in respect of transferring liability to the keeper in the event of a legitimate parking charge. The claimant, in their submissions, accepts that the defendant was not the driver, and confirms that they do not rely on POFA 2012 as the basis of holding the keeper liable. In the defendant's view, not only is this fatal to the claimant's case, but is likely to amount to a breach of GDPR, with potential damages due. In any event, the defendant is confused about the relevance of the 'law of agency' which the claimant relies solely upon for creating keeper liability - particularly as they have not supported it's relevance and suggested application within their submissions.

 

The claimant did not send the NTK in sufficient time according to the POFA 2012. The defendant received the NTK 43 days after the 24th October 2017 and as evident on the NTK provided it did not get printed until 36 days after.

 

The notice must be given by—

(a)

handing it to the keeper, or leaving it at a current address for service for the keeper, within the relevant period; or

(b)

sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period.

(5)

The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 14 days beginning with the day after that on which the specified period of parking ended.

 

 

I Need to present this properly.The debt collection costs that they're trying to claim for should be dismissed from the claim. does not allow for any additional costs to be passed on to the keeper.

 

Can I highlight the relevant parts of the POFA or must quote them in this witness statement?

Is this the correct section?

5) The maximum sum which may be recovered from the keeper by virtue of the right conferred by this paragraph is

the amount specified in the notice to keeper under paragraph 8(2)© or (d) or, as the case may be, 9(2)(d) (less

any payments towards the unpaid parking charges which are received after the time so specified).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes I realised that. My answer was to help you in your defence.

Ok thanks you x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

POFA is only relevant in the sense that they need to use it to hold you, in your capacity as Keeper (not driver), liable for the parking charge given to the unknown Driver.

They admit that they're not relying on it, so you do not need to point out how they didn't comply.

 

Simply argue that they need to use it, and that they have made no reference to the applicable statue upon which they rely in this instance, whereby they allege that you can be held liable for the actions of a third party. You could even point out what the law of agency actually is, and the circumstances to which it could correctly be applied

- thereby demonstrating how the claimant is incorrect in their application of it.

This will mean you'll been positive in undermining the crux of their case.

 

To be honest, this claim is there to be shot down.

They're hoping that you aren't able to defend it, but it's really not that hard.

Edited by dx100uk
spacing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh crikey I have put this together this afternoon and now doubting it is relevant but I don't think I can do much more right now and I have to print it at my friends tomorrow and take it to court x

 

1. The facts from this statement come from my personal knowledge except where I have indicated otherwise.

Where the facts are within my knowledge, they are true.

Where they are not within my knowledge they are true to the best of my information and belief.

 

2. I have included a pack of evidence with this statement.


3. The claimant has failed to show a cause for action by NOT responding to a CPR 31.14 request for documents and I think the claim should be summarily dismissed under CPR 16.4(4)

 

4. The defendant was not the driver at the time and the claimant does not rely upon the Protection of Freedoms act (POFA) 2012 to create a keeper liability in this matter so the defendant puts it to strict proof as to who was driving at the time.

5. The claimant has not complied with the IPC code of practice in one instance by not adhering to the POFA 2012 amongst other errors. See evidence

 

(Members of the IPC who issue parking charges within the private parking sector are required to subscribe to the AOS and adhere to this Code which defines the core standards necessary to ensure transparency and fairness.

 

The Code complements the existing laws concerning parking enforcement on private land. It is designed to enhance the conduct and culpability of members in order to increase
consumer confidence and raise standards within the industry.

 

It remains the duty of the operator to appraise themselves with any legal provisions concerning their operations and to adhere to them. In particular, operators should have a sound working knowledge of the following areas:

• The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (for operations in England and Wales)

• Contract - with particular reference to unfair contract terms.

• Tort – In relation to trespass.

• Occupiers Liability – both in statute and tort.

• Data Protection

• Consumer Protection and Disability Discrimination)

 

 

6. The POFA 2012 (Copy supplied) is the relevant law in respect of transferring liability to the keeper in the event of a legitimate parking charge. The claimant, in their submissions, accepts that the defendant was not the driver, and confirms that they do not rely on POFA 2012 as the basis of holding the keeper liable. In the defendant's view, not only is this fatal to the claimant's case, but is likely a breach of GDPR with potential damages due. In any event, the defendant is confused about the relevance of the 'law of agency' which the claimant relies solely upon for creating keeper liability - particularly as they have not supported it's relevance and suggested application within their submissions.

 

7. The claimant did not send the Notice to keeper (NTK ) in sufficient time according to the POFA 2012. The defendant received the NTK on the 6th December which is 43 days after the contravention the NTK clearly states it did not get posted until the 29th October which is 36 days after the event.

 

Protection of freedoms act 2012

The notice must be given by—

(a)

handing it to the keeper, or leaving it at a current address for service for the keeper, within the relevant period; or

(b)

sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period.

(5)

The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 14 days beginning with the day after that on which the specified period of parking ended.

 

8. The contract for parking states it is for customers only and so patrons of the theatre can never be offered the terms without the certainly that they will be breached, the signage represents an unfair contract under s62 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015

 

Consumer rights act 2015 Section 62

Requirement for contract terms and notices to be fair

(1)An unfair term of a consumer contract is not binding on the consumer.

(2)An unfair consumer notice is not binding on the consumer.

(3)This does not prevent the consumer from relying on the term or notice if the consumer chooses to do so.

(4)A term is unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations under the contract to the detriment of the consumer.

(5)Whether a term is fair is to be determined—

(a)taking into account the nature of the subject matter of the contract, and

(b)by reference to all the circumstances existing when the term was agreed and to all of the other terms of the contract or of any other contract on which it depends.

(6)A notice is unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations to the detriment of the consumer.

(7)Whether a notice is fair is to be determined—

(a)taking into account the nature of the subject matter of the notice, and

(b)by reference to all the circumstances existing when the rights or obligations to which it relates arose and to the terms of any contract on which it depends.

 

9. At the time of receiving the NTK the defendant telephoned the Theatre Deli and the theatre said that they are a charity and there is nothing they could do about it. They had already paid some patrons parking charges and they did not have the funds to pay anymore. The Theatre deli confirmed that they were in discussions with their landlord.

 

10. Since the event on the 24th October 2017 a system has been put in place for customers of the theatre to enter their registration numbers allowing them free parking during a performance. See evidence Theatre Delis ipad. VCS logo can been seen on the picture.

 

11. At the time of booking the show the defendant was not alerted via email, ticket or website that the parking at the site did not accommodate the length of the show, in addition there were not any signs directly outside or inside the theatre. Since the event an extra sign has been erected as you walk into the theatre which is clear evidence that the previous signs were not adequately positioned.

 

12. The signage at the entrance to the car park is especially unclear ” as it is situated on the left hand side at an angle and can not be seen from the inside of a vehicle. See defendants photo evidence.

 

13. The photograph’s that the claimant has provided are taken from a pedestrian who is standing at the other side of the road in daylight

 

 

14. In any case the signage is inadequate as it is so poorly sited and as it is not illuminated that it cannot be really be said it is brought to the attention of the drivers of vehicles entering the site at night.

 

15. In addition the yellow writing on a blue back ground says “Maximum stay one hour” cannot be read easily in the dark. The font above it which reads “St Marys Gate” is much clearer and readable.

 

16. The neighbouring car parks which belong to Decatholon and Bluebell wood charity have much larger and clear signage in comparison to VCS. This highlights the poor visibility of the signs erected by VCS at St Mary’s gate. Please see the pictures.

 

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

Edited by dx100uk
quote

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not a million miles away, I'd say.

 

On the point about the Consumer Rights Act, you could strengthen it a bit by stating

- "The car park in question provides parking for "customers only", with some of those being patrons of a theatre.

Signage at the site makes an offer of parking for the period of one hour [or whatever it is], whilst a typical theatre visit will take two hours [or whatever], as a minimum.

Therefore, patrons of the theatre can never be offered the terms without......"

 

You could also add

 

"Unless the Claimant has evidence to the contrary, there can be little confidence that monies being claimed have not arisen as a breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, thus rendering any contract void."

 

I'd be careful about admitting or alluding to you being the driver, as it could undermine your protection under POFA.

Edited by dx100uk
spacing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok thank.

 

Do you think I should leave out the tickets to proof we were in a show?

Edited by dx100uk
quote

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't use POFA if you also want to admit to being the driver.

 

Personally, I wouldn't give up the POFA argument, as it's too strong, and is the one angle I'd expect to see success from above all else (it's nice that the claimant has admitted that POFA doesn't apply).

 

What I've attempted to do above is allude to there being an unfairness within the terms (in support of the argument you have created) without making an admission of being the driver, thus cast further doubt on the strength of the claimant's case, without necessarily being conclusive.

 

I'd await any advice from some of the other guys too.

Edited by dx100uk
spacing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, now where you refer to other documents just leave the reference in the WS and use the whole document in your evidence bundle referred to as documant 1 etc. Makes it easier to read what you want to say without having to plough through bundles of stuff and lose the thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm really keen to see how this turns out as we have received PCN of £100 for the same car park and same reason. I've dug the envelope out of the bin, it does not have a postmark. The contravention date is 9th Feb.

Edited by Lisselle
add to post

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello and welcome to CAG.

 

You need to start a new thread of your own please.

 

Best, HB


Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hellooo,

I intend to write a fuller version of events but you can now head this thread with WON plus costs : )

 

In short the judge was not bothered about dates or POFA

the breach of the consumer rights act won it for me and the fact that there had been a change of practice as I had photographed the new registration system.

 

I admitted to being a passenger I also provided my two tickets for the show.

Lisselle you could contact Elaine at Moor management and ask for your registration to be added to their monthly allowance of registration numbers.

It says in the contract between MM and VCS that they are allowed 10 registrations per month.

 

I will be back with a full account of the proceedings.

Huge thanks to you guys for helping me have the balls to do this.

 

FYI the court case before me with VCS also lost.

Also what do you think is a fair dontation to Cag?

 

I had worked out my costs £312 but they only granted me my parking and hours lost for the day which I had worked out at just shy of £50.

I now know you can claim up to £95 for a days earnings.

Edited by dx100uk
spacing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done! I would have liked to have seen their 'law of agency' position tested, but the judge most likely picked the argument they felt most comfortable with and went with that.

 

Just donate what you feel you can afford, but bear in mind what the forum has potentially saved you too. :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done! :whoo: :whoo:

 

These fleecers couldn't give a toss about the law, their whole vile business model is based upon threats to get motorists to cough up, given most people are ignorant about the law. Congratulations on standing up to them and compliments on giving them a good kicking!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent VCS would try to invoice you for leaving a pushbike chained to railings in a car park they prowl if there was any way of finding the rider, they are that greedy. Shame that the Law of Agency malarkey wasn't tested but a victory is good.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congrats! Im so happy for you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...