Jump to content


VCS PCN Claimform - Broomfield Developements Broomspring Close. S37XA ***Claim Dismissed***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1024 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Don't cause yourself stress unduly by trying to go into too much detail with this. Just identify your key defence points and list them, with maybe a brief explanation for each one. You have at least four compelling arguments that I can think of off the top of my head. Make lack of authority the last one, as it's the "if you don't accept any of the aforementioned points, this one is the killer" argument.

 

P.S. regards to this... "Thanks lookinforinfo,  I will print it out and try and show to Judge" - don't attempt to show anything to the judge or Claimant's rep that isn't included in yours or their WS. You'll get your knuckles rapped and it may not do you any favours in the eyes of the judge. Just keep it simple and stick to presenting your arguments concisely, supported by the content (or lack of) within either WS.

Edited by shamrocker
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you should have included the letter in your bundle to VCS and the Court. That way I would think VCS would not wish to go to Court as they would have to admit that they had been issuing PCNs for several years

having no contract to do so. Completely blowing out of the water their statement that they  adhere to the Code of Conduct. As they haven't and also lied in their Witness statement, it should be pointed out that they should not be able to access the DVLA for motorists data when they have breached the Code for so long .

It should also be pointed out their other misrepresentation. as I pointed out on post 123 and 126.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi shamrocker, iv listed these points on my list.

 

Not the Driver.

1. Signage Forbidden + inadequate.  Give example. Explanations.

2. Notice to driver no compliant.  Give example explanation.

3 NTK not compliant.  Give example, explanation.

4. Further to this the defendant does not believe that the claimant has locus standi. In any case no contract was offered by the claimant to the defendant.
5. Challenge alleged contract. Give explanation.

 

I have also a list off points to make against there WS.

 

One last point they have supplied Picts in there WS, i have Picts that question their accuracy, can I take them with me to court, to late for my WS.
 

What do you think?

Edited by Geocyper
Link to post
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Geocyper said:

I have also a list off points to make against there WS.

How does this list of points assist your defence?

 

36 minutes ago, Geocyper said:

One last point they have supplied Picts in there WS, i have Picts that question their accuracy, can I take them with me to court, to late for my WS.

 

No, too late now. In any case, what facts/assertions would you seek to demonstrate as being inaccurate that will assist your defence?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

Just got back in VICTORY claim dismissed, did not have to say a word.

 The judge said many points to get through.  Then asked their rep, where is the nearest signage to vehicle and where is it on your pictures, site diagram.
 

He could not answer, case dismissed.

 

Thanks. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great news Geocyper, so basically they fell at the signage hurdle.  Will amend thread title

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

Hi Yes they did brassnecked.

 

I will try and get transcript if available.  The Judge got straight into their rep.  He told him quite a few detailed and technical points in defence, thanked me for index and detailed bundle.

The judge said few points to deal with on signage first.

(a) Is the signage clear and easy for an everyday driver to see and understand?  Nearest sign 23 meters from car, luckily had picture measuring it in WS 😊

(b) Does the signage form a contract with driver?

(c)  Is the sign in close enough proximity to the car?

 Then he said no point going through other signage points.

No to all 3 points, case dismissed. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoturned up for Claimant. a local solicitor, just handed the case? Looks like they didn't get a chance to say much at all. Well done that Judge.

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

A Mr McFarlane, he was a Solicitors Agent, asked Judge if he had Right of Attendance? judge said yes, left it there.  Nice Chap.

I just point out that they did not have the person who signed witness statement, told Bod I would raise it with Judge, he said Judge knew, not happy.   Anyway thats what they get for messing with the Black Watch (RHR)

 

Cheers.

Edited by Geocyper
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Andyorch changed the title to VCS PCN Claimform - Broomfield Developements ***Claim Dismissed***

now thier rep DIDNT have a right of audience so the judge used their discretion and I'm sure only so the bloke was there to receive the verdict that his client didnt have a leg to stand on and couild report it back properly and not let Simple Simon think that he had been done over by a technicality ( what like not having a  claim?)

 

wel done for doing your homework,  easy to follow paperwork with clear images make a big difference

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi ericsbrother,  Thank you for your help, you were spot on about signage.

 

i asked the Judge if he could be there, but if he could or couldn’t , the bottom feeder got same message. I got impression Judge had been down this culdesac before with these people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to VCS PCN Claimform - Broomfield Developements Broomspring Close. S37XA ***Claim Dismissed***
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...