VCS CCTV PCN Claimform - no stopping - Access Road to Pontefract Race Course, WF8 4PR***Claim Struck Out***

[dx100uk]

i'd p'haps concentrate on your claim only...IMHO?

you are very green and don't seem yet to be taking in or understanding a lot of the necessary information.

stop using the 'internet'

 

only use the cag Google custom search top right here

pcn claimform.

 

the 2 or 3 line std defence on just about any PCN claimform thread is ALL YOU NEED.

 

as for the rest

its not for you to act as policeman toward the landowners..not your problem

 

yes as already advised before the claim

prove VCS have no contract

no PP etc etc

but the results of that will be for your witness statement IF it gets that far...

 

[pinkabvelvet]

Ok thanks dx - I have been reading other threads on here (some older and some more recent ones) and trying to get a bit more clued up about everything.

Will try to find the 2 or 3 line defence on the other threads. I’m afraid I am completely out of my depth with all of this - I wouldn’t be able to do it without all of your help that is for sure! 

 

[ericsbrother]

yours is one of the easier ones, 

 

"1)The defendant does not beleive the claimant has the authority of the landowner  to offer contracts to the public nor to make civil claims in their own name and thus having no locus standi to make such a claim.

 

2) in any case there was no offer of a contract to consider so there cannot be a cause for action by the claimant against the defendant"

 

they know this but they are hoping you dont.

 

Read up on nay of the NO STOPPING cases and you will see why, (prohibitive signage, lack of performance etc) all the detail comes later

 

read  the last 2 years worth of the Parking Pranksters blogspot as you will fins a number of court cases there that you can quote when it comes to it.

 

By reading them now you will start to understand what this is all about. we can advise but we cant force you to understnad so you need to read widely but the place suggested is always accurate and consise as there is little in the way of comment that doesnt hammer the points home

[pinkabvelvet]

Hi ericsbrother

- thank you for this, definitely will start reading up on this!

 

I have a couple of weeks before I have to upload the defence onto the MCOL website so perfect opportunity to get a bit more clued up. After I submit, is there an average timescale for what happens next? 

 

Quick question:

- the NTK that I received only states the contravention date & the time of the contravention. 

It doesn't state the full duration of time that I was on this particular piece of land (from breaking down to being towed away).

Does this make their NTK invalid?

Thank you 

[brassnecked]

Don't think it makes any difference, it is a prohibition, so no contract can exist EB will know more

[ericsbrother]

As there has to be a grace period then there must be an observed from and until time.

 

However they are claiming that stopping at all is a breach of contract so the observed period doesnt apply but we and they know that this means it is a prohibition and not an offer to park.

 

It can be argued that the NTK isnt POFA compliant but that really isnt the point unless you intend to sue them afterwards and then you can use the argument to say they knew they had no right to acquire your keeper details.

 

the thing not to forget with all of this though is they are trying to make money by telling lies and they will either have to drop the claim at some point ( likely) or risk annoying a  judge for bringing a hopeless claim and you being awarded some massive amount in cost (less likely as they know they arent honest in their claims)

[pinkabvelvet]

Ok thanks Ericsbrother.

After I have submitted my defence, what is the normal time frame I should expect for the next stage? Would like to have a strong WS prepared  but don't want to jump the gun if there are a few more processes to go through.

[ericsbrother]

the next step will be that you get another court form called an allocation questionnaire.

That is easy to fill out, no to mediation and give any dates you are on holiday and then the case will be sent to your local court for allocation.

 

How long it takes from then varies a lot from one court to another.

My local court  has about 3 months from receiving the paperwork for a hearing date,

some are longer than that,

some can get simple claims heard in just over a month

 

once you have sent the allocation form back you can't sit back and do nothing because it may all leap out at you

use the time to gather whatever you think you may need and do your research as you will have to present your Witness statement and any other evidence at least a fortnight before the hearing dates and you will be wanting to do a draft statement and let us peek at it before you post it off.

 

It is usually on the receipt of your WS that the parking co chuck in the towel because if you just say "it isnt fair" or use arguments that £100 is too much they know they will win and wont be wanting to forego their dinner.

 

Show you understand the law and they will not want to have to pay a lawyer £50-100 just to have them hear you have been awarded £200 in costs when they can run away and  tell the same lie to another poor sap and try their luck again

[brassnecked]

They might have one more go at bamboozling you, they will send out a letter as a psudo Directions Questionnaire, stating that in their clients opinion the matter is so simple that they are asking for the caser to be decided "On The Papers" with no hearing.  That is a no no as you want your day in Court to roast them. On The Papers is their last gasp to try to scare you into paying, or letting it go through that way so they can get a default and their dodgy evidence and POC goes unchallenged.

[pinkabvelvet]

Super, thanks EB

- Will continue to research for my WS and get this drafted up in good time just in case my local court has a quicker turnaround.

Hopefully I can have a draft loaded in the next week or two.

 

I was out measuring the height of the signs this afternoon and I will take some photos to show how hard they are to read when in a moving vehicle.

 

They are also all on the passenger side as you enter so unless you have an open top car they would be very hard for the driver to see! 

 

thanks also Brassnecked - if I receive any further correspondence from VCS I will check in with you all before replying. 

 

Thanks so much for your help  

[ericsbrother]

hard to read signs also have their own reports on the Parking Pranksters blog so always use both sticks to beat them with as you cant be sure what a judge will find persuasive

 

they may decide that the POFA wasnt followed and that is enough or they may think that any sign is good enough if you can read it as its intent is clear ( the Scottish lady who was bankrupted suffered from this) even if it wasnt a contract.

 

yellow lines and blue badge parking fall into this as well despite having no legal meaning on private land and disobeying is thus trespass not a contractual condition!

[pinkabvelvet]

thanks EB - trying to to as much research as possible to strengthen my argument/ grasp some understanding. I seem to have fallen at the first hurdle by admitting to them that I was the driver unlike all the other threads that I have found.

 

[honeybee13]

pinkab, don't worry that you named the driver, it isn't normally fatal. The guys can guide you through this if you follow their advice at each stage.

 

HB

[lookinforinfo]

Apart from the parking-Pranksters blogspot, he also has another site at parking -prankster.com which has additional help and advice against the rogues like VCS. 

[pinkabvelvet]

thanks HB & Lookin - making lots of notes from the pranksters blog so will try his .com page too

[ericsbrother]

yep, the .com site is great for case law but combine it with anything from the blog because when it comes to previous cases you want to chuck the kitchen sink in as well

[brassnecked]

Absolutely, there is stuff on there regarding No Stopping as a prohibition, a PPC usually has no course of action, in that circumstance as there can be no contract to park offered,   There is plenty to undermine their claim.

[pinkabvelvet]

Thanks brassnecked & EB

- I have made a start at my WS and starting to feel more confident after reading around.

 

Will continue to research, snap some more evidence photos and will upload when I think it’s ready for you guys to give a once over  

 

on their sign they do state “no stopping or parking zone”

I am hoping to prove that at the point in which I made the decision to turn into this part of land there were no signs whatsoever to indicate this.

 

The first sign (which I did not see at the time of the “contravention” is also 7 feet up in the air, impossible to read when driving and at a junction where cars can turn right to join the road so you are busy watching the other cars.

 

I have found the prankster post all about this.

Then my car rolled to a halt and I had no grace period as my car was not in a functioning state. Plus the other points about them not having a contract etc etc.

 

Am I on the right lines? 

[ericsbrother]

the most imporanat thing about a "no parking or stopping" sign is that it is prohibitive in nature. the only reason a parking co can charge you for anything is because you have entered into a contract with them and then either owe them money as a contractual agreement or as a result of a breach of contract. A sign saying "no parking" or "no stopping" isnt an offer of terms for parking and if you think about it if it was an offer of terms the only way of forming a contract would be to break it so unfair terms anyway.

 

What you have considered so far is part of the whole story from your point of view and if you follow that by explaining as you are how you eneter the land, what you see (or dont) and what happened to your vehicle then you end up withat least 4 reasons as to why no contract was formed and thus broken so you cant owe them money for the same.

 

as said earlier, they know they are on to a hiding to nothing but wont admit they are wrong becasue they will never earn a penny ever again as they would know their demands are just plain fraud and will wait and see what you have to say before chucking the towel in so they dont have to pay you your costs of whipping them in court.

 

At the end of all this you will have a cast iron case for suing them if you have the stamina for a return match as they have obtained and processed your personal data without a reason for doing so. again they will whinge that they thought they were right but they have lost so many cases of this nature (esp at Liverpool airport) such a claim is laughable but again hope that you dont go after them.

 

If you feel like winding them up go and park there agin after the court case and see if they dare issue you a NTK If they dont you will know that they are just chancers and have not a grain of integrity in them.

[brassnecked]

The cases they lost at Liverpool John Lennon Airport relied on the same basic POC they applied to you.  there they have camera cars parked up which capture the "evidence"  They would invoice someone on a pedal cycle, or electric assist cycle if they stopped to read the sign, as in the camera car operator would drive up and demand the cyclists details as no VED to send NTK.  How do I know?  i phoned and asked VCS.  Agaon they would lose cyclist could tell them to Foxtrot oscar, or if they had details and tried court would be spanked there for sure if claim defended.

[pinkabvelvet]

Thanks EB - From your feedback and from all of the other threads I have been reading I  hope I am on the right lines with my WS. i'll keep going with it and upload when I think it's ready for your expert eyes! Currently at 21 points, trying to be very "matter of fact" and succinct with my points.

I know for certain that if I ventured there again and left my car there I would get papped by the ANPR car, I regularly see it and if a car is parked in this specific zone it suddenly appears from nowhere.

 

Thanks Brassnecked - I have been using the Liverpool threads as per your advice, if I win perhaps I'll use the money that i don't have to fork out to them and buy myself a bicycle to tell them to foxtrot oscar in person!

 

 

[ericsbrother]

there is a standard way of writing these things as well and that is in the third person so you write " the defendant" rather than "I".

 

Also avoid opinion where possible so no saying " i think that...." and you dont say things are unfair or improper unless you mean unfair as in the law of contracts and then you quote for example  S62 of the CRA 2015 for what unfair is.

 

refer to VCS as "the claimant" as well, it is not only the formal way of writing but it avoids confusion which can occur when you use terms like "they" or "Simon Renshaw-Smith" or "lying gits" as they can be interchageable but my not necessarilty always be one and the same

[brassnecked]

Judges will usually give more leeway to a Litigant in person, but they as EB indicates like at least an attempt at ptoper terminology, so the Claimant is bets way to indicate who you are mentioning, they don't like derogatory comments.

[pinkabvelvet]

thanks EB

- I have been writing in this formal 3rd person style, calling myself "the defendant" and have referred to VCS as "the claimant". 

 

Will go through and make sure I consistent throughout! So far i haven't put anything about "unfair" but I will insert it and quote the reference you have advised

 

With regards to references, for example if i refer to a specific thing ie IPC Code of Practice Part B11.1, in the annex & exhibits would I just put the excerpt in there or the whole IPC CoP document?

 

Also, do i have to print off 2 copies of everything ie, annex, ws, all exhibits & photographic evidence ets? (1 for me, 1 for the court & 1 for VCS)?

 

Thanks BN - will make sure i follow your advice! As much as i would like to slip in a derogatory remark about "the claimant" i will hold my tongue

 

I have a first draft of my WS if you wouldn't mind taking a look.

 

I won't upload the annex/ exhibits just yet (as they would need to be redacted and tidied up etc) but from my WS you can understand what the exhbits are that i am referring to.

 

Comments & feedback greatly appreciated!

 

FYI The section in bright blue, i am not sure if this should be included or whether these would form the basis of a counter claim? 

 

GDPR section highlighted in green, the source i used was a little old -  is there an updated GDPR reference I should include?

Witness Statement Draft.pdf

[ericsbrother]

I will read it carefully but the 1st thing that leaps out at me is para 3 . 

They havent failed to show a cause for action BECAUSE of their failure to respond to a CPR31.14 request for documents, but you can say the defendant doesn not beleive they have a cause for action because they have failed to produce evidnece of a contract with the landowner etc UNDER a cpr31.14 and it is believed they have no locus standi in this matter

 

and the you can attack their paucity of the particulars of claim by saying they dont say why they are suing you, and in what capacity and whether it is for monies owed under a contractual term or for breach of contract, both of which are denied.

 

on 6 they are not a BPA member but as the BPA is the main trade association they have to show that they either comply with their code of practice or show that what they do is somehow better than this( and that couild be the IPC CoP if markedly better for the protection of the public, not just to favour the parking co)

 

where you quote the parking pranksetrs blog you quote the case number that the commentary refers to and you copy the entire blog as part of your evidence bundel, same with pictures, maps etc

 

at point 24 it is the GDPR 2018 tat is the relevant law and you need to read throught the guidelines as to how this applies but they have been caught with their pants down before so they know they had no "reasonable cause" to obtain your keeper details in the first place and the process this information.

 

they have lied to the DVLA and this is actionable should you fancy suing them but unless you are counterclaiming ( tricky strategy) keep it minimal as to the effect of this breach cos it isnt criminal.

 

what I would also do is tell the whole story of what happenred after your denial of any breaches of contract but before you go into the detail of why they are wrong.

 

So a short bit about driving to the land from the ( whatever public road) and no signs were visible.

You broke down and called the recovery service. in the meanwhile some chap turns up and starts photographing your vehicle without explaining why or asking if everything was OK or offering help in getting it moved.

 

then say how long it took for recovery and add the bit about docket for same.

You can then say that VCS failed to mitigate any supposed damages by not asking why you were there, offering to help you move or even warning that you aren't allowed to break down without incurring an unlawful penalty charge for doing so.

 

Now apart from making them look like the slobs they are it also raises important legal points about mitigation of losses and puts the onus on them to explain why they did nothing other than just take pictures wich themselves may fall foul of the GDPR because there was no express consent which would be required unlike the use of a ANPR system.

 

This point may be outside the interest of this case but worth looking at the GDPR and at least suggesting they have abused their contract (if they have one) with both their employer and the data subject as there should be a minimum of a warning that they are taking pictures of people for this purpose rather than just the anonymised numberplate capture that is covered by a different section of the law. ( worth asking the ICO office if VCS have permission for taking individual puictures of identifiable people fro purposes that are outside the nature of their business) and different ICO registration