Jump to content


Geocyper

VCS PCN Claimform - Broomfield Developements ***Claim Dismissed***

Recommended Posts

I have had another look at the WS and make another point.

 

Point 54 is misleading.

It states that the NTK must be posted within 14 days after the day of the offence when what Schedule 4   

[9.4 ]says is that the letter must be delivered WITHIN 14 days from the day after the offence which is what the WS confirms but then misses off the crucial wording  "relevant date" on [9.5  ] so it reads as if the NTK can be sent off any time within 14 days which is wrong.

 

It then says the NTK was sent before the 14 days.

But that may not have complied with Schedule 4 as if the NTK had been sent on the 14th day it  would have arrived too late.

So the WS was misleading again.

 

This calls into question the accuracy and veracity of the WS which is what you want to get the Judge to disregard it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to thank everyone for there comments and advice.  
 

Shamrocker,  Ive looked at your WS copy, I wii modify it.

 
i am a bit unwell at present so hope to comment fully in next day or two, this is getting me down, but I need to challenge it because it is not righ.

 

Thanks again.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good Morning,

 

Just got letter from VCS offering reduced payment, from £160 to £125, not accepting.

 

They have gave me 14 days to accept offer (Case listed to be heard in 13 days).  They say "Under CPR rules rules litigants are expected to try and resolve their disputes wherever possible".  If I do not settle then they will bring this to the courts attention, costs.  Are the allowed to do this?

 

Thanks.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

doesn't matter at all.

just another begging letter

 

dx

 


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Final throw of the dice before they admit defeat, maybe.

 

Did you do the witness statement?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi shamrocker, yes I did I tailored it around mine but kept most of your structure and points, thanks for copy you sent, all the points were relevant to my case.

 

Thanks again.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all, I have just noticed I have forgot to attach copy off CPR 31.14 Request in my bundle, can I just send a copy to VCS and court ASAP?
 

Thanks.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What was provided as part of the CPR response that's crucial to your defence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi shamrocker, sorry not got back to you, I had to reset my account someone trying to login to it.

 

Hi nothing, they never replied to it within the 14 days.  I forgot to put the original request in my bundle.

 

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All,

 

Wrote to Fairways for information on Permit parking some time ago.  Seems more than one management company here.

 

I got this letter Friday.  Its all seems rubbish to me, court date Thursday, any help with contents would be helpful.

 

Thanks GY

Permit Scheme. copy.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The management Company have misunderstood the law also referring to Fines and Penalty Charge Notices. which VCS cannot lawfully impose, the PPC equivalent is a Parking Charge Notice. don't know if that letter is of use, but perhaps ericsbrother and lookedinforinfo will have some thoughts.


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 OTHER

 

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!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi lookinforinfo, with regards to your post 126.  Are you saying that VCS WS is misleading, even although I got the PCN within 14 day period?

 

That this is what I should raise with Judge?
 

Also they say a PCN Placed on car, (it was just a card) surely under POFA If they are claiming keeper liability, the must wait 28 days before NTK, am I right?
 

They are not using POFA, but claiming they are complying with it, I’m a bit confused.
 

Thanks.

Edited by Geocyper
Bad grammar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How have you concluded that they are not relying on POFA?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi shamrocker, it’s not mentioned in any documents, in their witness statement etc.

 

If you look at their WS, 39 to 41, my reading is they are not relying on POFA, but claim to be compliant with it, at no time do they state that under POFA 2012 schedule 4, they are claiming to transfer driver liability to the keeper.

 

I may be wrong.

 

Thanks.

 

 

Edited by Geocyper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also there was no Notice to the driver placed on car.

 

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

p.37 refers to legal remedies being available to hold the keeper liable. p.41 states that their position is that they can hold the registered keeper liable.

 

I'd say that's pretty conclusive that they are relying on POFA.

 

Regards the notice to driver - they mention in their WS that this was issued and that evidence of such is exhibited. What have they disclosed in relation to this?

Edited by shamrocker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Geocyper said:

Hi lookinforinfo, with regards to your post 126.  Are you saying that VCS WS is misleading, even although I got the PCN within 14 day period?

 

That this is what I should raise with Judge?
 

Also they say a PCN Placed on car, (it was just a card) surely under POFA If they are claiming keeper liability, the must wait 28 days before NTK, am I right?
 

They are not using POFA, but claiming they are complying with it, I’m a bit confused.
 

Thanks.

 

You are onto something here... POFA s.4 states:

 

"6(1)The second condition is that the creditor (or a person acting for or on behalf of the creditor)—
(a)has given a notice to driver in accordance with paragraph 7, followed by a notice to keeper in accordance with paragraph 8...

 

8(1)A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to keeper for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(a) is given in accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are met....
 

(4)The notice must be given by—
(a)handing it to the keeper, or leaving it at a current address for service for the keeper, within the relevant period; or
(b)sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period.
(5)The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 28 days following the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to driver was given."

 

In the Claimant's WS, from para 54 onwards, they refer to p.9 of POFA regarding the issuing of the notice to the Keeper. They're relying on the wrong paragraph because, as they've issued a notice to driver, they should be relying on p.8, as I've quoted above. The notice to keeper can then only be issued once 28 days have passed. They're stating that it's 14 days, and that they have done this in your case.

 

Did you include POFA as a WS exhibit?

Edited by shamrocker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

shamrocker, yes i did.  I included the whole POFA 2012 Schedule 4 in the pack, and the card that was placed on windscreen.

 

CY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, that's good. Did you say the hearing is this Thursday?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it’s on Thursday.  I will contact you on here tomorrow if that’s ok, I’m a bit tired now, some more points I need you to look at on witness statement theirs,

 

They have not included any evidence of windscreen ticket in their witness bundle just mentioned a card informing the driver that a a breach of the terms and conditions MAY have occurred, 61 in their witness statements.   Where in POFA does it say they can do that to comply? Rhetorical 🙂

 

Thanks.
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"...inviting them to take appropriate action."

 

I think they refer to p.22. It's all a bit shambolic really.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the letter sent out by the developers talks about VCS issuing "penalty fines" and "penalty charges".

Now does that mean that VCS have been instructed to break the law?

 

the thing about the card not being a NTD is a wheeze invented by Gladstones/IPC and hasnt been tested in court.

 

As said, that would require a copy of Hansard for the Bill's final reading as it was enacted so the intent of parliament can be seen.

 

You will need to hope that your expanation of the slight of hand by VCS to the judge is accepted but I must admit that I am not clear exactly where you car was parked ( yes I know the overall address) and whether it was actually private land or the roadway that was already existing when this development was built.

 

Now the council can unadopt a highway ( usually temporarily) so that is somehting else you will need to be able to answer with some conviction, they will tell lies or possibly say fairview told them that they could march all over everywhere so it must be true.

We have seen cases where the judge has looked at public land with illegal signs on as still offering a contract!

Share this post


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...