VCS PCN Claimform - no stopping - spycar CCTV - Liverpool Airport "offence"

[Hobnail]

If the claim was issued on the 3rd of november is it not too late to file a defence?

 

From what I can gather we had 14 days acording to the MCOL website.

 

Although I thought I had 33 days?

 

Confused.

 

 

[FTMDave]

You did Acknowledgement of Service, right?

[dx100uk]

As long as you did AOS as i advised earlier, you have a total of 33 days whereby date on claimform is ONE in the count.

 

this was explained carefully in the Q&A you filled in in the 1st place and in my AOS/cpr post.

 

Dx

[dx100uk]

On 08/11/2021 at 19:22, Hobnail said:

Name of the Claimant : VCS

 

Claimants Solicitors: ELMS LEGAL

 

Date of issue – 4 NOV 2021

 

Date for AOS – 22 NOV 2021

 

Date to submit Defence – 6 DEC 2021

 

What is the claim for –

 

1. A breach of contract for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land.

 

2.Defendants vehicle was identified in Liverpool John Lennon Airport on 30/08/2019 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited .

 

3.At all material times the defendant was the registered keeper and/or the driver.

 

4.The terms and conditions upon entering private lane were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct.

 

5.The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply, namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability.

 

6.claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice , contractual costs and interest.

 

What is the value of the claim?

 

Amount Claimed £160

court fees £35

legal rep fees £50

Total Amount  £245

 

[Hobnail]

Yes got it Aos was done so we are okay until the 6th of December.

 

I'll throw a defence together using something from the forum for the MCOL Defence Particulars box and post it here to get some feedback.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Hobnail]

Found this.................

 

1.  It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of [motor vehicle].

 

2.   As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance.  The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner.  Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim.  The proper claimant is the landowner

 

3.  It is denied that the Defendant breached any terms and conditions set on private land.

 

4.  It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant, or broke any such contract.

 

5.  The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety.  It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all.

 

Please delete the one above.

 

How is this?

 

It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of [motor vehicle].

 

The driver of the vehicle had not been established. None of the photos give any indication of who was driving.

 

It is denied that the Defendant breached any terms and conditions set on private land.

 

It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant, or broke any such contract.

 

The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety.  It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all.

[dx100uk]

nope use our std 3 -5 line defence in every no stopping thread already here.

 

dx

 

30 minutes ago, Hobnail said:

Found this.................

 

1.  It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of [motor vehicle].

 

2.   As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance.  The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner.  Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim.  The proper claimant is the landowner

 

3.  It is denied that the Defendant breached any terms and conditions set on private land.

 

4.  It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant, or broke any such contract.

 

5.  The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety.  It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all.

thats the one!!

 

whatever made you think the other was correct. not searching outside of CAG are we...

[Hobnail]

Confused now.

 

I was right first time? or second time?

 

So many pages to trawl through trying to find a relevant one. Both are off the forum and not from anywhere else though.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

First one methinks as I edited one for the second attempt.

[dx100uk]

I think poss the 2nd might have been from a very old thread, things have moved on

 

but please let the experts check and advise....youve a few days yet

 

dx

[Hobnail]

Ok I'm going to post this on the MCOL website as my Defence Particulars.

 

1.  It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of [motor vehicle].

 

2.   As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance.  The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner.  Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim.  The proper claimant is the landowner

 

3.  It is denied that the Defendant breached any terms and conditions set on private land.

 

4.  It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant, or broke any such contract.

 

5.  The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety.  It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all.

 

Is there anything else I should doing?

 

I did receive a letter from ELMS over the weekend regarding my CPR 31.14 request.

 

They only sent me 3 photos of my partners car stopped at the airport and 5 of the PCN's from VCS.

 

So none of the document requested in our last letter.

 

Should I post it up?

[brassnecked]

No that's more than enough, Less is More at this stage, its only a skeleton Defence needed real meat comes at Witness Statement stage if it gets that far.  Just hold fire until a couple of the other's looks in.

[FTMDave]

Looks good to me.

[dx100uk]

Always best scan up anything they send to one mass pdf.

you never know wholl spot what

[Hobnail]

I don't do a counter claim do i?

 

What about any aditional details on the MCOL form.

 

They have partners name, addres and d.o.b only.

 

cheers

 

 

So here is the latest letter from Elms responding to my CPR 31.14 request.

 

They also sent me 3 photos of my partners car stopped at the airport and 5 or 6 of the PCN's from VCS.

 

Plus copies of my snotty letter to them and a copy of VCS's letter to us telling us Elms will be dealing with it.

 

I haven't posted them as the PCN's are already in the thread and the letters are just copies.

 

They cannot send requested documents as they don't exsist. No contract.

 

Cheers

 

 

elms reply to CPR.pdf

[dx100uk]

no you never counterclaim no. you've not seen that mentioned here either.

 

please try and remember to use pdfmerge website , ive merged single pages for you above again.

 

34 minutes ago, Hobnail said:

What about any additional details on the MCOL form.

 

They have partners name, address and d.o.b only.

 

cheers

not sure what you mean?

 

dx

 

[Hobnail]

They have aditional info on the defence MCOL form....

 

Telehone number and email.

 

Do I just leave them blank?

 

 

[dx100uk]

NO!!

the only people you dont give those too are the fleecers.

[Hobnail]

I HAVEN'T given them to Elms or VCS. Can they access the MCOL site?

 

So should I give the MCOL site them details of just leave blank?

 

Please be clear.

 

Ta.

 

 

 

[dx100uk]

Give full details to mcol

[Hobnail]

Ok cool.

 

Defence submitted to MCOL.

 

Should we be doing anything else at this point or wait to see what Elms/VCS do?

 

Witness statement?

 

Thanks

 

[dx100uk]

not for a good few weeks/months if at all.

 

however the court will write upon whats next and should ACK your defence filing.

 

no harm in you reading as many no stopping 

threads as you can HERE.

 

then you'll know what MIGHT be to come and how to deal IF it does progress through the various stages of the claim.

however as always, dont ever do anything toward anyone without check here 1st 

[Hobnail]

Ok nice one and cheers for the help.

 

[Hobnail]

Okay so last week we received the N180 from from the C.Court.

 

Proposed allocation to the small claims tracks.

 

Reading the other threads I can see I respond with the following.

 

Mediation - NO

 

Small claims Track - YES

 

Hearing venue - leave blank as they will sent me to my local c.court?

 

Expert evidence - NO

 

Witnesses - ONE

 

Hearing - NO

 

If these are correct my other half should sign and send back to northampton?

 

[dx100uk]

No you state your local court

 

and yes to a hearing...you dont want a papers only decision.

 

3 copies

1 to the court

1 to there are using one (omit phone/sig/email

1 for you file

[Hobnail]

Where do i find local court? Gov.uk?

 

1 to there are using one (omit phone/sig/email - Do you mean one to VCS?

 

1 for you fule - One for our record?

 

Cheers