VCS ANPR PCN claimform - Berkeley Centre Sheffield, S11 8PN

[ericsbrother]

you are right, the NTK is from VCS and the signage belongs to Excel parking.

Both are companies owned by Simon Renshaw-Smith ( hereafter referred to as simple simon) but they are not one and the same so you owe nothing as they have failed to create a liability under the POFA or accountingh law as it applies in the UK (and the rest of the world)

 

So, what to do? Ignore them and any dca they employ to send scary letters adn the  respond in a forthright manner to thier letter before action or letter before claim. That is some months away so just keep us informed of what threatograms you receive until that point.

 

BTW, the signage isnt a contract anyway so even if they remembered who they were there would be no breach of contract to chase you for and they will lose a court claim in that regard.

[ericsbrother]

note that if you look up the bit of the BEAVIS decision they have quoted you will find that it doesnt say that at all, it says as long as they are NOT extravagant and unconscionable and that £80 was the figure quoted.

 

Perhaps VCS are now above the supreme court in legal circles but the govt have just failed to tell anyone this before.

 

as for the added unicorn food tax,

well they have decided that you were the driver at the time otherwise they cnat add this and that will damage their claim if they do try court as you can put it to strict proof they are chasing the right person cos they dont word their NTK's correctly

 

bugger, I forgot, you threw that protection away by appealing

[ericsbrother]

no problem with that as company car, better to take it on rather than let employer pay up when they dont have to.

 

As Simple Simon cant remember who ihe pretending to be today do not reply yet, in truth it would be better if it gets as far as a court claim then you have a perfect defence regarding their lack of locus standi but we will suggest a suitable response once it gets beyond the usual DR+ threatograms demanding £160

[ericsbrother]

and guess what, it is £160.

Ask yourself where they got that figure from as it wasnt on the NTK and the POFA limits tHe amount that can be claimed from the keeper to the amount on the original invoice.

 

This is one of the reasons we say dont contact them at the outset but let them make all the mistakes.

Expect threatograms form DR+ now

[ericsbrother]

no, the law doesnt allow it but they rely on ignorance to collect money that isnt due (on top of the dubious demand that 95% of the time is duff)

dont presume anything, check

[ericsbrother]

so now you need to respond to this letter.

A sensible response is: Address letter to Simon Renshaw-Smith at the VCS office in Sheffield

Dear Simple Simon,

I am in receipt of your LBA but fail to see what the cause for action by VCS is against me as the parking at the site and thus any contractual offer and consideration is with a different company that according to Companies House has no relationship with VCS.

As there is no cause for action this makes me wonder what reason was given to the DVLA for the aceesssing of my personal data and so invite you to drop this ridiculous claim  before you spend even more of your money on this by way of settlement of  a counterclaim as per VCS v Phillip, Liverpool CC Dec 2016.

I look forward to your deafening silence.

 

In short you let them know that they have been rumbled but without being polite, pleases and thank yous are not part of their make up.

[ericsbrother]

simplest to just email back and say you didnt agree and wont be partaking of their services

[ericsbrother]

Simon Renshaw Smith doesnt believe that the law applies to him or his companies. 

If you have legal cover with your car or house insurance now is the time to look it out and get them involved as appeal costs can be unlimited. If your insurer is prepared to stand by you then let simple Simon know you will be hiring a solicitor and barrister at say, £300ph

 

Also you need to read up on performance of contracts, it is possible that in some circumstances the contract with the LL is immaterial but can VCS actually provide you with something they are offering if another company is the one you made a deal with.

 

VCS have been thrashed on this before both there and at another site and that is why he is playing the big one and hoping the result is different this time round.

 

The courts may of course deny him his appeal if they believe it is a hopeless case or there was no error in law or matters of fact.

If there is an errors in the matters of fact chances are it is VCS who were wrong so the judge will be entitled to reach the conclusion he did anyway.

 

I expect that it will die a death but look out your insurance policies anyway

[ericsbrother]

good, let them know the situation so they cant run away from it