Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Looks like they are just submitting their previous WS as their case so the new COP should bite them on the bum, along with no Keeper Liability.
    • a) Debit transfer into his personal account  b) i - yes     ii - yes   iii - initially quoted £25,000 - £30,000 for the whole job.  This escalated to nearly £44,000.  Would ask for money in stages for materials and labour. c) Runs a Ltd company with his wife d) Assets include van, own digger, dumper and cement mixer but kept in unknown location    Solicitor advised not to throw good money after bad as he could just shut down company.  
    • I've had another look at their WS and as it definitely states that they are pursuing you as the keeper in point 19 they must lose their case because their PCN is not compliant with PoFA on two counts.  First is the fact that they must have a parking period and it is quite clear that entering and leaving the car park does not constitute a parking period since some of the time the motorist is either driving around looking for a parking spot then leaving the spot and driving to the exit. All that takes time so that is one fail. The other fail is in their wording when they are trying to transfer the liability of the alleged debt from the driver to the keeper. They are supposed to include at Schedule 4 s9 [2][f] this "(if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met)". That in itself makes it non compliant but the fact that they haven't got a parking period means they haven't met the applicable conditions.   Looking at their contract, the names of the signatories and their positions in their respective  companys have been redacted. You do need strict proof of who actually signed. There is no specific authorisation from the Client to allow Court action in pursuit of non payers. In section 11 which is like an addendum it states" the Company shall provide parking control" but doesn't state if that includes legal pursuit as well and it does not appear to be signed.   The entrance sign does not include the T&Cs so it is only an offer to treat  not  an offer of a contract. Their only appears to be one type of sign inside the car park which is unusual and a lot of the signage is in too small a print to be acceptable in Law as capable of forming a contract. The signage also includes unlawful demands for extra charges which makes the whole contract invalid.  PoFA 2012 made it quite clear that the maximum  amount claimed was the amount on the sign. This has been reinforced by the Private Parking Code of Practice which states that no extra charges can be made over the signage figure. Indeed a Government Minister is quoted as saying that the extra charges demanded by parking companies are "a rip off" yet they still include them. They are an abuse of process and should be subject to adding exemplary costs payable to the motorist to act as a deterrent to rogue car parking companies.   They have no planning permission for their signs and ANPR cameras which means that in addition to them being unlawful because of the extra charges they are also illegal because they have not been given permission to be there under  the Town and Country [Advertisements} Regulations  1969. They are supposed to comply with the Law and the IPC code of Conduct and they have done neither. The new Private Parking Code of Practice  draws attention to it as well  s14.1 [g]  "g) responsibility for obtaining relevant consents e.g. planning or advertising consents relating to signs."   So it is not as if this is a secret-since it has been out since February 7th 2022 . You would have thought that as this Code was designed to root out the rogues in the industry that the parking industry would already have made adjustments to their activities in order to align themselves with the will of Parliament as proposed by Minister Neil O'Brien  who said   "The publication of this Code therefore marks the start of an adjustment period in which parking companies will be expected to follow as many of these new rules as possible."   Ignorance of the Law is no excuse but even Gladstones are surely aware that the extra charges are unlawful  it beggars belief that they can aver that they have told the truth on their WS.
    • Evening all,   I am looking for a little bit of advice, any would be appreciated. I am a bit hesitant in giving all the in's and out's as I am not sure of the forums procedures and I do not want to compromise my situation.   Basically as a result of a few issues in my life inflicted/self inflicted I ended up in a bad situation financially. A company brought a debt off a lender I had used and took me to court, I really mis-managed this and although I attended court with a case the verdict went against me. I accepted this but never heard anything back from them and admittedly as I was struggling didn't pro actively seek them out to make payment. So, on my Credit report I had a CCJ due to expire Sept. 2022, which I associated to that particular incident. Anyhow, I have recently received a Notice of Application for Attachment of earnings order, however, this is regarding a completely different debt/Court procedure to the one I participated in. The creditor, to my knowledge has never contacted me and until this week I have never received any correspondence to this case from the creditor or county court.    Basically, I was just after a bit of advice, on how to go about this. I am worried that if my employer is advised of the CCJ, it makes my position uncomfortable, maybe untenable which will only be negative to my situation.    So can I still contest this and possibly get it removed via the courts, can I delay it for 3 months to get it statue barred, do I pay the whole amount (to a company whom brought it at a pittance) or do pay it off and if so, can the figure be negotiated and how long would it affect me credit score?   I apologise for the number of questions, and appreciate any advice. My concern is the application ruining a very good job for me.   Thanks in advance
  • Our picks

VCS/ELMS Spycar PCN PAPLOC now Claimform - Liverpool Airport - No Stopping


_Ray_
 Share

Recommended Posts

If not, any suggestions what the letter should say?

 

Many thanks

 

Well for a start, the figure of £60 plucked out of thin air and added to the initial "debt". The original "debt" being nonsense as this is a bye-law matter which they have no interest in. The fact you know they are serial bottlers who soil their underpants when it comes to actually appearing in court.

 

Make it clear that you've sussed them, their claim is rubbish and you would have no problem humiliating them in court.

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 OTHERS

 

 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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks pretty magnificent to me!

 

I'd be tempted to send a copy to VCS as well, as dodgy solicitors are quite happy to egg on their clients to go to court knowing they will lose, after all they still get paid.

 

You don't have to waste money on recorded delivery, but get a certificate of posting (free) from the post office.

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 OTHERS

 

 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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to VCS/ELMS Spycar PCN PAPLOC now Claimform - Liverpool Airport - No Stopping

dx is spot on.  Don't play any cards at this stage.

  • Like 1

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 OTHERS

 

 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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

The usual VCS cut & paste carp - we put loads of signs up mate, loads & loads & loads, honest.

 

In the midst of all the cut & paste, I noticed Ambreen was hesitant in (6) about the contract.  Well then we see why.  It ran out on 7 July 2015!

 

Anyway, you need to get your own WS done.  Alaska101 too had to face a VCS airport no stopping claim.  Look at the attachment at post 110 here (sometimes the post numbers go a bit wonky, if it's not post 110 it'll be a couple of posts above or below 110) where there is a cracking WS you can use as the basis of yours

 

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/421775-vcs-spycar-pcn-paploc-now-claimform-no-stopping-east-midlands-airport/page/5/#comments

 

 

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 OTHERS

 

 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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great work from lapwing_larry.  Make sure that's included in your WS when you rubbish their contract.

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 OTHERS

 

 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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I've just had time to read things properly.  That is one hell of a Witness Statement  👏

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 OTHERS

 

 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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Sorry for coming onto this so late.  The following is not essential at all, but lately we have been putting these two paragraphs in right at the end of the WS just to undermine VCS further -

 

XX  Ambreen Arshad (Claimant Witness Statement para 31) is being somewhat disingenuous when she says she "may" be unable to attend the hearing.  I have researched scores of VCS court cases and I cannot find even one where Ms Arshad has ever appeared in court.  The same goes for Mr Mohammed Wali, the other paralegal employed by VCS to write witness statements.  This is particularly remarkable as hearings have been by telephone or on-line during the COVID pandemic, with no travelling involved.  It seems that under no circumstances are VCS willing to have their witness statement authors questioned in court.

 

XX  VCS make great show that their actions are supported by their trade association, the IPC (Claimant Witness Statement para 24).  Until 2013 there was only one trade association for the industry, the British Parking Association. Its appeals body cancelled too many tickets for the likes of VCS, who “jumped ship” and joined a new, rival association, the IPC.  Of course it is of no surprise that a breakaway biased trade association rubber stamps VCS's actions. It is neither here nor there what the IPC considers reasonable or lawful. What is important is what the law in England & Wales considers reasonable and lawful.

Edited by FTMDave
Typo

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 OTHERS

 

 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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Costs are capped at small claims so if you win you can only claim travel costs, postage, etc.  Were VCS to win they would only get their £50 legal costs plus court fees.  You ask when you win the case, so have a list of costs prepared.

 

This cap only changes if the judge decides there has been unreasonable behaviour in litigation, and the bar is quite high.

 

VCS have a policy of not sending their WS authors to court.  This may or may not be connected to a famous case where their representative was threatened with imprisonment by the judge.  They will go running to a solicitor practising near you who won't have a clue about the case.  This will cost them a hell of lot more than £50 so you've already hit them in the pocket.  And yes, you can bring to the judge's attention that you would have liked to question the WS author but VCS have a policy of never, ever, ever allowing this person to appear in court.

 

 

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 OTHERS

 

 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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have a look at the PPC Successes thread at the top of the page.  Start with the last page of the thread and work backwards.  Open threads with "VCS" and "claimform" in the titles.  Reportbacks from court should be near the end of the threads.

 

You'll soon see that neither Ambreen nor Wally ever, ever appear in court.

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 OTHERS

 

 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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Agreed.  I hadn't realised till LFI pointed it out yesterday that the basic law has been on the statute book since 2019.

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 OTHERS

 

 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

Link to post
Share on other sites

BN is right.  We had a case recently where:

 

1.  Simple Simon filed his WS.

 

2.  The Cagger filed theirs.

 

3.  Simon tried to be clever and filed a supplemental WS with various lies, trying to counter the Cagger.

 

4.  Now, accepting the supplemental WS is at the judge's discretion IIRC.  But logically if the judge accepts extra info from one party they will accept extra info from the other party.  So the Cagger gave Simon a taste of his own medicine and in turn filed a supplemental WS.

 

So if VCS are allowed to write an extra WS you'll be allowed to counter.

 

 

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 OTHERS

 

 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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...