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

[_Ray_]

Well, it's been almost 4 years since this thread first started about a PCN I received from Vehicle Control Services back in Jan 2018 for allegedly stopping (the driver didn't stop, they just turned round because the road is a dead end) at Liverpool John Lennon Airport. 

 

Originally I followed the advice on here and their previous legal representatives, BWL, eventually gave up the fight. Now it seems VCL have a new legal team, ELMS Legal Ltd, and they have decided to issue a County Court claim, despite me responding to their LBA in exactly the same way I responded to BWL.

 

Here are the details of their claim and a copy of the claim form...

 

Name of the Claimant - Vehicle Control Services

 

Claimants Solicitors - Edmond Shoreman-Lawson of ELMS Legal Ltd

 

Date of issue - 03 Nov 2021 

 

Date for AOS - 22 Nov 2021 

 

Date to submit Defence - 06 Dec 2021 

 

What is the claim for –

 

1.The claim is for a breach of contract for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. The defendant's vehicle, XXX XXX, was identified in the Liverpool John Lennon Airport on the xx/xx/xxxx in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited.

 

2.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.

 

3.The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the 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, namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability.

 

4.The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest. 

 

What is the value of the claim?

 

Amount Claimed - £160.00

court fees- £35.00 

legal rep fees- £50.00 

Total Amount- £245.00 

 

 

Many thanks for any help you can offer.

 

 

 

[lookinforinfo]

Interesting. Elms were kicked out by VCS some time back and they have been using BWlegal who are even more inept than Elms. Who would have thought that was possible.

 

As it has taken them a couple of years to pluck up the courage to pursue you  I guess greed has overcome them. Nothing to worry about though. Their NTK is not compliant so they cannot get you as keeper; they lose time and again because  the airport is covered by Byelaws and or the Road Traffic Act so the land is not relevant land;

 

no stopping is prohibitive and does not offer a contract so you cannot have breached a contract and the Peel group now do not own the whole of the airport -they only own about 55% so if their contract with VCS was signed before 2019 there are questions to be asked as to its current validity.

 

Any one of those would be enough to invalidate their 'claim' against you so don't lose sleep over it. And these days the case is carried out over the phone as opposed to in Court if VCS do actually decide to go all the way with it.

 

I think they would be stupid to do so but greed and being advised by Elms [or BWLegal] are possible reasons for this action. 

 

[dx100uk]

i ve removed the claimform we don't need it

 

pop up on the MCOL website detailed on the claimformicon.

.

register as an individual on the Gov't Gateway Site
Go to HMRC's login page.

Click the GREEN sign in button.
Click “Create sign in details”
Enter your email address where asked.
You will now be emailed a confirmation code. ...

You will now be issued with a User ID for your government gateway account.
 note down your details inc the long gateway number given, you might need it later.
 

then log in to the MCOL Website

.

select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box.

.

then using the details required from the claimform

.

defend all

leave jurisdiction unticked.

click thru to the end

confirm and exit MCOL.

.

get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim

type your name ONLY

no need to sign anything

.

you DO NOT await the return of paperwork.

you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.

………….
 

[_Ray_]

Thanks for your reply. I've responded to the claim on the MCOL website - I have a quick question about the CPR 31:14 request before I send it off though if that's OK...

 

When this thread originally started, it was mentioned any parking 'offences' at Liverpool Airport would be covered by byelaws, so do I need to request any additional info because of this?

 

Thanks

 

 

Ray

[dx100uk]

No dont play any cards ....simply send as is.

 

now get reading a few 10's of no stopping threads

[_Ray_]

Just a quick question...

 

I've received a reply from Elms Legal regarding my CPR 31:14 request. They sent me a contract between VCS and LJLA, quite a few images of the car, some pages of what looks like their internal tracker system with information about me and notes on the case, and all the NTK's they have sent out.

 

Nothing regarding planning permission.

 

Do you need me to scan and post these docs?

 

Thanks

Edited November 29, 2021 by _Ray_

[dx100uk]

sorry yes please one mass PDF ONLY!!

read upload CAREFULLY

[_Ray_]

Took a while for me to get a pdf small enough for the uploads limits but I've managed it now.

 

Thanks

 

Elms SAR return.pdf

Edited November 30, 2021 by dx100uk
pdf renamed from CPR return to SAR , photos rotated in PDF

[dx100uk]

i have renamed the upload to SAR as it doesn't mention anything about being in relation to your CPR 31:14 letter?, it clearly states this is their reply to your SAR.

 

pages of photos/database dumps rotated too.

 

dx

 

[_Ray_]

Don't know if it's important, but that information was what I received in response to my CPR 31:14 request to Elms Legal as advised in your post (#51) above. Is it an important distinction?

 

 

[dx100uk]

page one of your PDF clearly states in their letter it is in response to your SAR but ofcourse you've not sent an SAR? you only sent our CPR letter.

sorry but it just shows how inept and useless they actually are...

 

it makes no odds you've got information now and as you'll see on the other JLA no stopping threads, all that contract stuff has been totally torn apart.

 

just dont miss your defence filing date

[lookinforinfo]

Their contract is pretty good compared to others issued by VCS. However Liverpool Airport Ltd are not the main land owners. The Peel group are and the main owners are apparently a Pension fund in Canada. When responding to their WS when you do your WS you must include that there is no link from Liverpool Airport to the Peel group allowing them to operate on their behalf so rendering the contract not properly executed. 

 

It is strange that they still do not know if they are pursuing you as the keeper or the driver. It obviously cannot be as keeper since PoFA does not apply because the area you stopped in is not relevant land under PoFA. And the PCN is non compliant despite the fact that the say they can pursue you as the keeper if you do not cough up within 28 days.

 

The only way they can pursue you is if they can prove you were the driver. The bar for that to happen is pretty high in Court-they cannot assume that you were the driver. You haven't indicated that you were even driving so it could have been anyone-a  relative, a friend or even anyone who has car insurance of their own. As long as they continue to claim they are pursuing the keeper they are on a very sticky wicket.

[_Ray_]

Putting my defence together today...

 

Might be a dumb question but if I forget to include something I intend use in my witness statement, would that prevent me from including it in the said witness statement if it gets to that stage? 

[dx100uk]

our generic defence covers those very issues.

[dx100uk]

our generic defence covers those very issues.

 

read this thread

 

 

[_Ray_]

Pasting my proposed defence below - it is due on Monday, but I'm away all weekend so I will have to submit it tomorrow. Thank you to all the people on the forum who contributed on all the other posts that allowed me to 'borrow' all of this info.

 

On a number of threads I've seen particulars of claim noted above the defence, should I include that or leave it out when I submit the defence? Not sure if it's intended to be helpful for the judge or s/he would take a dim view of it if I did?

 

Just on point 3, I wasn't the driver of the car, should I say that or not?

 

 

Particulars of claim (for reference only)

1.The claim is for a breach of contract for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land.

 

2. The defendant's vehicle, XXX XXX, was identified in the Liverpool John Lennon Airport on the 16/01/2018 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited.

 

3. At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver.

 

4. The terms and conditions upon entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations.

 

5.The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the 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, namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability.

 

6.The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.

 

 

Defence

 

The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature which fails to comply  with CPR 16.4.  The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.

1. Paragraph 1 is denied. It’s denied that the defendant ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land.

 

2. Paragraph 2 and 4 are denied. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance.  The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by, and the terms of entry set by, the landowner. 

 

3. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. The claimant is not in a position to state who the driver was at the time.

 

4.  Paragraph 5 is denied the claimant has yet to evidence that their contract with the landowner supersedes  Liverpool airport byelaws. Further it is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract.

 

5. Paragraph 6 is denied, there are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge.

  

Therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to evidence its cause of action and contractual costs and what loss it has suffered. 

 

The Claimant is further put to strict proof that it has sufficient proprietary interest in the land, or that it has the necessary authorisation from the landowner to issue parking charge notices, and to pursue payment by means of litigation.

 

The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety.  It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the recovery or any recovery at all.

[dx100uk]

no use flamjams one.

 

you simply copy and paste it as is

 

1.  It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of xxxxxxx

 

2.   As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance.  The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner.  Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim.  The proper claimant is the landowner

 

3.  It is denied that the Defendant breached any terms and conditions set on private land.

 

4.  It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant, or broke any such contract.

 

5.  The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety.  It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all.

[brassnecked]

Try using  3 lines  your line 1, 3, and 5,  less is more don't give them any idea how you would defend at WS stage, just hang fire until the other team member's have had a look.

[FTMDave]

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

[_Ray_]

Perfect, thanks - defence filed...

[dx100uk]

No get reading up here, no stopping. Threads

 

so you know whats to come as each stage happens, what to do and how to react. But ofcourse always check here 1st before you do anything.

 

DX

[_Ray_]

I've received the N180 from the court - it needs to be filed by 23/12 so just wanted to check a couple of points. Sorry if you've answered these question a million times, but I haven't come across them...

 

1. For contact details it asks for phone number and email address, now obviously I don't want VCS to have this info, so what's the recommendation?

 

2. Taking into account the Christmas post, do you advise signed for postage or is proof of posting good enough? 

 

Thanks

[dx100uk]

To vçs no, to court yes

no to mediation

1 wit you

 

the rest is obv

 

look in any no stopping claimform thread here already

 

Dz

[_Ray_]

Thank you...

[_Ray_]

Elms Legal no longer acting on behalf of VSC which is pretty standard stuff from what I've read on similar threads. They said if I pay just £185, they will make this whole thing will go away - such kindness is rarely seen nowadays 

 

I think I'm right in saying that once the case has been allocated to a court, it's at that stage they have to decide whether they want to pay the court fee - is that right? How long do they get to pay after a case has been allocated?