Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Minster are seriously a bunch of muppets if they think they could secure a court win on what they have currently provided document wise...still i am not going to be complacent 
    • Hey,   Just wanted to share a quick experience for a lost Hermes parcel worth a couple of hundred pounds. I accepted Hermes' offer to use mediation and was pleasantly surprised! I read all the threads on here and thanks to the Bankfodder's great advice I came in confident and with notes and was not prepared to reduce the claimed amount even by 10p.    Firstly Hermes stated that my item was not one that is normally covered and due to its fragile nature it is not compensated and secondly they gave the ordinary "you have not opted for insurance bla bla". These were their points and even before I started stating my arguments they were already out with an offer to cover the item value in full and the postage costs for it but NOT the small claim fee of 25 pounds. To me this sounded as a reasonable compromise since I got other things to do during the day. This 25 pounds compromise was about 5 percent  of the overall claim value so that was fine by me.    I went to mediation extremely sceptical having read some of the other ppl's experiences, but I'm glad to say mine took only 2 quick calls, everything was settled in no more than 20 minutes, the mediator was superb, extremely friendly, polite and with a sense of humour  and they just asked me to send my bank details in response to their upcoming email and that was that.    p.s -> I could feel the mediator was actually on my side a lil bit, but what reasonable person would side with such a shameful and honestly disgusting company anyway   All in all, I would highly recommend the experience for anyone who's still on fence regarding mediation. Open small claims against them Hermes mfs, make them pay, they are so aware of their unlawful approaches ! On my part, I will never ever use Hermes services ever. However, in fairness, this whole saga's been going on for two and a half months and I've lost so much time and effort and nerves on the matter that it was worth at least 10 times that settlement. I've been through 41 calls with them regarding the item and went to their depot twice to look for my item...   Have a great week guys/gals   Best
    • i see you have all the statements in the earlier post    pop welcome int rate in cell d15 of out CI sheet Latest Spreadsheets - PPI Claims and Charges Claims - Dec 2011 - Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) - Consumer Action Group   enter every penalty charges. on it date    
    • dx I manage to locate quite alot of paperwork from welcome sent previously - what am I looking for? Im a bit worried that they are going to start court proceedings after their letter last week, im not keen to send them bank statements   Hi peterbard this is a secured loan , i dont believe there is any policy in place   dx should I have sent an SAR to Welcome and Coast even though Coast had taken over the loan?  I have a pile of paperwork i have located thats about 2 reems of paper, from the SAR's I have sent previously.  There is a lot of information - the SAR requests more recently were sent on CDROM and were not accessible after a certain amount of time (i think the username and passcode expire or something)
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies

VCS/BW PCN PAPLOC Now Claimform - no permit - Woodside Business Park, Peel Investments, Birkenhead


Recommended Posts

One thing I didn’t do, was no all the pages. I numbered the WS part, but because I divided the Exhibits so clearly, I didn’t think it was worth it.

 

have i cocked up with that, shall I ask the court to number the pages too?

 

sorry about this just fretting cos it’s last day (14 days) that’s all

Edited by Dave962
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 242
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Go as per DX use what EB suggests as a guide, along the lines of you had no legitimate claim 3 years ago, i haven't and you, I and BW legal know this, and I haven't forgotten, sure EB will call in and

not being funny dave you've been here since 2016   more than enough time to realise cag is also a self help forum and we have a very good custom google search box on the left after clic

How about tis- Dear sirs, I am surprised that Simple Simon is wasting his money hiring the parking world's second worst solicitors to chase up a claim that both you and he knows is spurious.. Sho

Dont push your luck you are lucky they are going to  insert the missed exhibit...asking them to number them is really pushing too far.....you are litigant so should be allowed a little leniency.

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 The National Consumer Service

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Andy.

yeah I’m happy they can make that one significant change. It is pretty crystal clear how I’ve divided it, I just wasn’t sure how serious a sin this was, if it was like a game changer or something. Hopefully the clarity of the bundle otherwise marked is enough.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I received VCS' WS yesterday, shall I post it up?

 

As for the extra documents in the bundle, I can see:

 

A VCS Terms and conditions of Contract (Fully comp scheme), between VCS and Peel Holdings (L&P) Ltd

They have omitted the incorrectly labeled sign map, and replaced it with a OS Map of the business park, with only the boundary of the car park marked on it.

A VCS Sign, that has seen the BPA sign replaced with IPC - However, the sneakiest part is that the revision at the bottom, is EXACTLY THE SAME AS EACH OTHER! 

They have included new photographs of the sign on site, which clearly show the site number - funnily enough, this picture was not sent to me last time, and I have no evidence of signs with site numbers that they sent to me.

The pics are from 2014 too, don't know if that makes any odds?

Photographs of the car on the day.

My appeal and their reply.

Funnily enough, they have omitted the photograph showing my actual Woodside Business Park pass, even though they sent that to me in the early days.

Thats all they have included in their bundle really, not much else except copies of N149A and N9B.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

which is why i said wait till monday to send yours......

 

yes scan it up to one multipage PDF

we dont need each exhibits cover sheet nor , if they have, the complete printout of any cases they refer too.

 

 

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry DX I thought it needed to be in by Friday ideally.

 

But yeah gutted about that as it's utter tosh what they have done there.

 

Is there any chance I will get a chance to speak at the beginning of the case, just so I can throw these little pieces of info into the melting pot, before the judge casts his vote?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 08/10/2020 at 11:15, dx100uk said:

i will try and read through today..

if your hearing is the 23rd then ideally yours should be at least with the court tomorrow

don't worry if you are a days or 2 late as i said before use your LiP status to your advantage.

 

i just hope you never gave anyone an email AD as simon will pull a fast one and email you at 1 min to midnight of the day its due.

full of lies that you cannot counter in your WS.

 

 

 

said it numerous times.............:frusty:

 

don't worry you'll get plenty of chances to cross examine them, 

speak when spoken too, but don't let them railroad things, if you need to speak up, do so, the judge won't mine, but as i said, let them run through it first and in your turn high light the problems...i've not read it yet.

 

also just remember that whomever wrote theirs MUST be in court, else you immediately point this out, 

simon has a nasty habit of getting people to make up mostly hearsay evidence rubbish in the VCS WS then hoping defendants don't point out the important fact that they must be allowed to cross examine the person that wrote it face to face .

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

That works in your favour as DX says there is a chance if the judge has seen a few  VCS roboclaim cut & paste POC before, they might well chuck it out when you highlight author of WS not present.  Simple Simon just hopes he can get On The papers, or some local brief to wing it for him.

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

 

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

What a load of old twaddle, 95% is just cut & pasted from the last one we saw.  I doubt the judge will be very impressed with pages & pages of guff describing their company and the great work they do that has SFA to do with the case.

 

Interesting that they warble on about bye-laws, even though the car park isn't covered by bye-laws.  I think that you can use this to your advantage if they actually do do court.  You arrive, you see no VCS sign but you do see a sign about bye-laws.  It's obvious you'd think the place was covered by bye-laws and you continued to think that for months.  Even VCS think the place is covered by bye-laws.  Yes, they've managed to even confuse themselves!

 

They "manage" the car park so well that they leave misleading signs around and even mislead themselves!

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

Yes another Simple Simon RoboClaim, with the usual cases chucked in, with beavis that is inapplicable to most cases as it turns on its own facts and is used to justify the Unicorn Food tax that got OPS a severe tolchocking in Lewes County Court. several things to chew their nuts off with, assuming they turn up to get their nuts chewed. off

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

 

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the electronic signature count for anything?

 

The only other things I have left out are my V5 document from the new car (sale date), and photographs from the parked car and N9B N149A forms. Thats everything.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

no proof of annual payment by the managing agent since 2009!!??

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes that’s all they have attached, no other exhibits.


yes I see what you mean there, why would they not have just sent their most recent agreement through?

Seems a bit random doesn’t it.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

thread tidied

full claimant WS in post a few up

 

there is no proof the client has paid the contract since 2009.

they can't override your firms supremacy of contract 

they issued your permit

the fact you didn't have it on the day is totally immaterial.

 

the client who employed VCS manage the car park is the same entity that issued you with a permit to park there, :crazy:

therefore no claim.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks DX and Dave, all noted and much appreciated for taking the time to read through it. Seems a bit all over the place doesn't it. I just hope the judge can see through all their skullduggery too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had a quick look at planning permission for signs to be erected in Woodside carpark

-they would come under Town and Country planning [advertisements] regulations 2007 and couldn't find any application or approval for them.

 

Without the signs their signs are there illegally [not unlawful -illegal so a criminal offence].

As such their signs should not be there and no contract can be formed by a criminal compact.

 

As they haven't admitted in their WS that they do have planning permission you can say that you believe they do not have it.  In addition, this would not be the first time they have not the necessary permissions which puts them in breach of their Code of Conduct and calls into question no 5 in their WS that they have full compliance with the Code.

 

It also calls into question whether they should be allowed to access DVLA records.

You should be able to bring this up since the VCS WS did not arrive until after you had sent your WS to the Court.

 

You could also add other cases where VCS have not complied with their AOS Code of Conduct  ie they have complied with all the Laws pertaining to parking. "VCS Court" cases may bring some up as may Parking Prankster v VCS .

 

It would help in as much as if you can shred that statement 5 in their WS it shoots down what they are trying to show. That is that they are the good guys, the ones that observe the Law as opposed to you who is not paying your debt to them. {It is a debt that you do not owe them but that has never stopped them in the past to pursue.]

 

The contract refers to Peel Holdings agreeing VCS to comply with the BPA Code of Conduct and the contract allows VCS to immobilise vehicles which is now against the Law. So there is no contract -it fails on three accounts -BPA, immobilisation and out of date since it was only valid for one year with no rollover option.

Also no mention of Peel Holdings agreeing to the amount charged to motorists who breached the T&Cs.

 

Of interest perhaps -https://uk.linkedin.com/in/nicola-dearden-883965143

states that she has been the property manager for Peel for 12 years, not David Smith as signed for on the contract.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Draw up a checklist to keep at hand of the points brought up against what is in their WS so you have it at hand as to  what question to ask to  get them to drop themseles in the do do with the rubbish WS and POC

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

 

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks LFI and BN, some amazing pieces of information there, and I appreciate the depth at which you and everyone has looked into the matter.

 

I've got a couple of busy days the next couple of days, but after that, I have a few days off were I can really get stuck in, and draw up a checklist like you suggested.

 

Will I be cross examined by VCS on the day, will I need to be prepared for a raft of questions they may ask me too?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If no one turns up they can't ask questions, think the others might mention about whether the person they send has " Right of Audience" asd is actually allowed to speak, the others can expand on that, but the checklist is so you have a ready answer cross referenced to where they seek to challenge your WS, with other stuff in theirs.

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

 

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks BN

 

Just checked, the court has received my papers now so that is good. Just thinking, do I need to send evidence of my proof of posting to the court, in advance of the court date to prove it was posted in good time? I'm just thinking in case there is some daft delay on the day due to this. I appreciate you have said many times I should be allowed a day or two grace.

Link to post
Share on other sites

no.

 

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

I've been reading up  on the RoA, and just to be clear, does that mean then in my case, that basically Yasmeen Couser must be in attendance tomorrow? I take it if someone else is speaking on VCS behalf, then Yasmeen at least needs to be in attendance?

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...