VCS ANPR 2015 PCN claimform - Berkeley Centre Sheffield S11 8PN ***Claim Discontinued***

[ericsbrother]

You do the same when writing up scientific experiments so say things like  "and then an exothermic reaction was observed"  rather than "and then I burnt the lab down"

[anniebattlemum]

Love the example!

 

The claimant's statement is surprisingly full and detailed, written by a paralegal, and includes appendices with photographs of the signage, photo of the location (could be google earth) with signs marked on it (don't know whether they are from 2015 or current), and contracts which are very small print and need serious examination.

 

They refer to cases which I have already looked at, including Beavis, and they actually mention POFA and claim to be in full accord with IPC regulations.

 

Won't be a pushover and this week I'm tied up helping with the Defendant's 2 babies.

It could be this weekend before I get it posted up here.

[dx100uk]

quicker you get theirs up the better

i bet there is a rolling contract but no proof of recent payment.?

 

 

 

dx

 

[anniebattlemum]

Well it's from a member of the "Litigation Dept".

Don't see how that can be when it's been registered with Companies House as a dormant company for years, including 2015, year of alleged contravention!

Dormant company means no business activity and receiving no form of income. 

 

Just looking at the VCS contract,

it says it's between the managing agent and VCS & gives them absolute right to collect charges from PCN;s.

 

It doesn't show a contract between the landowners & the agents giving them the right to pass on that right to another party, but the contract is signed by somebody from the agents but says "authorised to sign for and on behalf of the client" (i.e. the landowners).

 

Does that make it legit?

The contract just says it's an agreement made on 25/11/2010 and it's signed by VCS & the agent. 

[honeybee13]

Is there anything more recent than 2010 or anything that talks about the contract being renewed every so often?

 

HB

[dx100uk]

Litigation dept...it'll be simple simon using someone elses name I bet..

 

and ofcourse being signed upto in 2010 and doesn't  prove that whomever signed up with VCS had been paying the yearly contract tto keep it alive.

 

dx

 

[anniebattlemum]

The "agreement" made 25/11/2010 states that the Company (VCS) will provide parking control service for a full period of 36 months from 1st December 2010. That's it!

No renewal and turnover has been growing ever since.

 

I don't understand how it can be dormant for corporation tax yet be trading significantly. 

 

The client is the property fund landowner c/0 Lambert Smith Hampton (the agent) - that's what it says.

However the landowner is not a party to the agreement.

 

It's signed by Lambert Smith Hampton (the agent) and above their signature it says they are authorised to sign for and on behalf of the client. (the landowner)

 

1 condition of agreement is that they operate in accordance with BPA Code of Practice. 

 

There are some rules about the client (landowner) being allowed to cancel PCN's. 

 

There is no date when the document was signed by our friend Simon and a person from the agent's company.

 

I wonder whether this constitutes a contract between the landowner and the motorist, or whether we need to see the contract from the landowner, signed and authorised by the landowner, giving the agent these powers to authorise VCS to do everything the agreement says they can do.

 

Interesting - the copy of the sign showing terms and conditions which is in their bundle, refers to wheel clamping and vehicle removal being in operation.

 

That was made illegal in 2012 I believe (and Mr. Clampit was forced to shut down that operation).

 

Surely a sign like that can't comply with BPA Code of Practice??

[FTMDave]

Ho!  Ho!  Ho!

 

Well spotted, no, no way can it comply with the BPA Code of Practice.  Big own goal from Simon.  Can you upload the silly sign?

 

It also means the sign could not possibly have been in the car park your daughter parked in and so VCS have lied, and the person who signed the witness statement lied in pretending they knew the facts therein were true.  All excellent (yet more) fuel for the fire for your own WS (don't use the "word "lie" though, be a bit more indirect.

 

Great work.  I wish I'd had a Mum like you!

[dx100uk]

much better to wack the whole WS upto one multipage PDF

we might spot things you don't.

 

 

[anniebattlemum]

Many thanks for your vote of confidence Dave but actually I'm feeling grossly incompetent.

I was burning midnight oil last night trying to get a PDF file up onto the site, after editing it in Word to eliminate ID,  but failed dismally. I will try to get help from another daughter tonight.

 

Would it be inappropriate to upload the contract as I don't see any evidence that it applied longer than 36 months (up to 2013), nor any evidence of the landowner assigning the rights to the agent to contract in a parking company that can pursue motorists in their own name - in fact there is nothing at all from the landowner, just the agent claiming to have the right to act in the landowner's name. 

[brassnecked]

No post it up, as if that is the contract they sent, that is the one they are relying on to sue. Instead of lie say that the claimant misrepresented  something.

[anniebattlemum]

I need some IT lessons, but here is the Claimant's Statement. The contract which they are using will follow. Thank you all so much for your patience.

MRW claim_Complete document_12022020.pdf

 

The contract on which they base their claim.

Contract.pdf

[dx100uk]

scan up the ALL witness statement please

i'll megre it if you must use single  files.

but if you just get it all into pdf format

then use the site listed in the upload guide pdfmerge you can merge them all to one file yourself

 

 

 

 

 

[ericsbrother]

the other thing that VCS  and other parking co's do is tell lies about where their signs are and what they say so you will have to go there and photograph the signs and make note of their locations so you can show any disparity.

 

Mpw a thing to bear in mind is that the GDPR was introfuced in 2018 so do their signs mention this of the DPA when they say about obtaining  keeper details?

If they mention the GDPR then regardless of what the content says about parking they are trying to pull a fast one and once caught out telling lies the rest of their evidence will be taken with a pinch of salt.

[anniebattlemum]

I did go there months ago Erics Brother and do have some random photos. However, the parking site is now managed by the partner company Excel and has a ticket machine with only an hour's free parking - everything has changed at some point since 2015.

 

I only have 2 basic shots from 2015 which were unearthed from The Star newspaper archives and I don't even know whether the signs from 2015 would be in the same place as the current ones.

 

It's hard to disprove their story but I'll compare my current shots with the layout they've sent and see if there are any similarities.

 

They didn't apply for Planning permission and seem to be suggesting their contract gives them the right to install signs.

 

They are focussing a lot on signage though, so I have to shoot that down, although my case really depends on POFA and grace period. 

I'll try to get everything into a pdf compressed file asap. 

[ericsbrother]

your defence relies on everything you can chuck in as you dont know what the judge will place weighting to and what they will ignore.

 

Do not leave out things that can be used even if they arent part fo your main argument.

 

there is a case here recently where Dawood v Camden was the decider and although that has been suggested as a reason for saying the parking co has no rights this case is the only example we have seen where it was chosen by the judge to be the main reason for rejecting the claim.

[Parking Fines Ltd]

 

 

 

================================================

 

This was an attempt to post a spamming post on this website. We would suggest that any company which has to resort to spamming should be avoided

[ericsbrother]

any indication on what the judges used to make their decision as the 2 companies- VCS and EXcel are not linked and there is no assignment of any contract by the LL nor one easily allowable in the terms of the contract.

 

there are cases on the Parking Pranlsters blog about the Simple Simon's inability to tell what role he is playing on a particular day and he does try his luck with a lie about the supposed relationship between the 2 entities but there is no law to support that but judges will assume that they are being told the truth inless you can show otherwise

 

so get digging.

[lookinforinfo]

I don't know if you have run out of time on this but looking at their WS there is an example of being economical with the truth [ie they lied] 

 

5_ At all material times, the Claimant has been an Accredited Member of Approved Trade Associations certified by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA), and was awarded Approved Operator Status through its full compliance with their Code of Practice for Private Enforcement on Private Land and Unregulated Car Parks. This Code of Practice gives recommendations in regards to the signage within the Car Parks and the Claimant follows these recommendations.

 

As you have found, VCS have not got planning permission for their signs-so not compliant with Code of practice.

 

https://perincuriam.com/vehicle-control-services-b-w-legal/-

 

failed to comply with  Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013.  yet the Code of Conduct requires that they comply with all aspects of the Law.

 

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/375195/response/917126/attach/2/FOIR5735 Alex Shipp.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1 

 

this shows that VCS were issuing tickets where Excel were the company that could issue tickets. So excel had no contract and therefore fraudlulently claiming money.

 

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?act=attach&type=post&id=16231-

 

this is a serious one as the Judge was threatening their brief that if there were similar cases in his Court that day or next, then they had better bring their tooth brushes with them.

 

This was for leaving the premises which means there was trespass involved, yet the contract did not allow VCS to pursue trespass cases.

 

The Judge points out that VCS are in breach of clause 6 on page 6 of the Code of Conduct and this would not have been a one off as stated by the Daily Mail at the time

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2150551/Thousands-beat-parking-fines-judge-tackles-766k-Mr-Clampit-landmark-penalty-claim-case.html

 

It does call into question whether VCS should be granted access to the DVLA data as they have not kept to the Code over many years and these examples are just the tip of the iceberg.

 

So to brag that they are fully compliant with the Code also raises doubts about the accuracy of the rest of the WS

[anniebattlemum]

Thank you all so much for all the tips and info.

I'm still OK for time to submit our WS, not so good re time to work on it,

but I do have a 10 page draft that needs a lot of chopping to make it more succinct, and directly relevant to their statement.

 

I certainly was proposing to mention the lack of Planning Permission, although the investigators at the council chose not to take action unfortunately. 

 

All that non compliance with BPA is great

- the suggestion was they switched to IPS because it was less exacting

- but the contract refers to BPA so that's fine.

 

Also they were banned from using the DVLA at one point but I don't know whether the two are connected.

[ericsbrother]

you print off all of these cases with their reference numbers etc, a screen shot of the relevant page will suffice if text print proves difficult.

 

You then refer to them in your WS and they become part of your evidence bundle.

make sure they are easily identifiable by using coloured page tags as well as a ref number.

 

the more you can find the better and make a note of

the judge's title who heard the case> aA DDJ carries less weight than a DJ and an HHJ has to be listened to by a lower rank or risk being chucked in prison for treason ( if only!) 

 

Basically county court decisions are persuasive unless it is an appeal heard by a higher ranking judge doing the circuit when it carries thei weight of a higher court and then it becomes compelling

 

Again there is precedent for this pattern, see Broderick( actually Brodrick  but the courts misspelt his name) v Gale and Ainslie Ltd.  Swindon CC

[anniebattlemum]

I hadn't considered using previous cases lost by VCS to discredit their claim, but will do so if you think that's reasonable and relevant. I have their statement all together in a compressed zip folder in pdf format, but it's still way too big, so will try to get help on that asap. Thanks for indicating the importance of the Judge's status - I hadn't considered that either. There's a lot still to be done. 

[dx100uk]

you must use refs to previous judgements etc.

 

I would have thought you'd have seen that tactic already whilst doing research on relevant threads here

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[anniebattlemum]

Yes I have printed out several judgements for evidence,  wherever I saw a similarity to our own case, but most of them involve other PPC's, so it looks as though anything VCS has lost could be relevant in terms of their integrity.  I do remember having a laugh about the toothbrush comment!

[brassnecked]

If cases have similarity no locus, no contract etc doesn't matter which PPC it is .