Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Homer did say not to contact DR+.   If that's all the paperwork you have, sit tight and see if a letter before claim/action turns up. If you get one - and you may not, come back here and we'll help you to write back.    Or if you get more threatograms, let us know and we'll let you know if you need to take any action. In the meantime don't write to anyone and keep any correspondence for now.    HB
    • Hi DX   That is the only info letter I have we can't locate the first letter or original parking fine notification My wife said there wasn't  anything on the car windscreen. Do I ask the DC for the original notification ?   what shall I do just wait until they pursue through court ?   apologies for lack of info  Cancookwill
    • Hello, I've been following this thread and have some experience to share... Stand by for lots of words.   About 6 weeks ago, the engine seized on my car - 10 days before planning to use it for our 2 week trip around the UK!  I searched the internet for companies who could replace/rebuild the engine and get it back to me in time... One company that came up was 169 UK. I called the number and explained my predicament and the chap on the phone (who called himself Lee - I'm not convinced this was his real name) promised that if the vehicle got to him the next day or so, he'd have it done in time for our holiday!. He gave all kinds of reassurances about the types of vehicles they work on, from Porsches etc, even people from Spain taking their cars to him.. All work came through 3rd party websites (how i'd found them too) so you generally wont find reviews.    I was weary going into this, but you got to put your faith somewhere, right? so off it went on a trailer to Essex. NOW... I'd already asked where it would be going and I also tracked it by leaving a mobile phone hidden in the car. Interestingly, the place i was told i'd be collecting it from was not the same place the recovery guy (called Patrick?) told me he was delivering it to..    Anyway, they get the car and straight away tell me that the sump is full of diesel and that my ECU is faulty and its locked open one bank of injectors - causing the failure. All of this is feasible, but it meant that the car would not be ready in time for my holiday  He also tells me the DPF's (i'm sure it only has one, but he referred to there being more) were also completely blocked solid and needed to be dealt with (in this case, drilled and mapped out - which is also illegal) All of these little extras have now taken the cost from £3500 to nearly £5000  - as he was " putting together a special package for me" I tell him ok, i'm now away for 2 weeks so you have a little more time, i'll collect it when i get back.  I call him on the Friday before we travel home, asking how its going... he says "well, we aven't done it.. you said you were gonna be away for 2 weeks" apparently he marked to dairy wrong. So i call him again on the Monday following, I say I want to collect it that Thursday... not unreasonable. He then starts with the excuses that he has loads of guys off sick at the moment etc.. BUT, The car IS in the workshop and the boys ARE getting on with it. I say, OK.. but keep me updated daily as i need to make arrangements to come and get it. Tuesday passes without a word, so Wednesday morning i txt him asking for an update. He called me back around and hour later to tell me that the ECU they sourced for me is also faulty (they tested it before fitting it as they're nice like that) and it has water damage so he has to get another one, but that isn't going to get to him until the following Tuesday - which brings us up to this week.   Everything up until this point has been feasible if not a little annoying, BUT here is where is gets good...  On Sunday i happened to be in Essex on other business so decided to swing by Basildon and see if i could find my car. Knowing where it had been dropped off before the tracking phone died, i had a good idea where to look. And i also had the address of the garage where i'd be picking it up from. Hoping to not find it too easily - after all, it was being worked on on the Monday; Imagine my surprise to find it in the exact location it had been dropped off 4 weeks previously!  I lifted the bonnet - nothing had been touched.  The amount of dust on the bodywork and distinct lack of any hand prints etc strongly indicated that nothing had been touched and it certainly hadn't been moved in all that time. He may well have taken the ECU out to test but put it back, that's easy to do - but there is now way to tell from there that the DPF is blocked without removing it, or having full access to the ECU - which is faulty, remember?  It had all been LIES.  Now i am annoyed, but informed and he doesn't know that i know he's been lying to me.  I spent the next couple of days talking to various people i know and arranged my own recovery to get the car back - even if that meant effectively stealing it back. Long story short, i had it collected and got it back to me last night.  The guy who collected it went to the garage i'd been told i'd be collecting it from - Unit 28 Noble Square( Essex car and Commercial) and asked for Lee... Low and behold no-one by that name works there and the car (and others parked in the same place) were nothing to do with them! but then one guy did say "oh hang on, i think i know who you mean, let me give him a call"... 10 minutes later, 'Lee' showed up.  My man then had to endure conversation with this charlatan, but did glean some information that might be of interest.  "LEE" doesn't directly do any of this work... he takes on jobs, maybe up to 30 at a time and then farms them out to local garages. This explains why nothing had been done and why so many others get stuck in this net.   I was surprised that he was calm and didn't get the hump about me taking the car back, i still don't really understand what the scam is, but there definitely is one.  I think i've been very lucky that no money has been paid, i owe him nothing and i got out of there.  The amount of mental anguish and anxiety this has caused me has been extreme.  Now i'm back to square one, still with a broken car. But i'm only £500 out of pocket (for the recovery each way) and not £5k that it was supposedly going to cost... at some point, who knows when!     
    • Good luck from me as well Dixon, fingers crossed.    HB
    • Last time, the Judge provided me with, I would say, the most amount of time to speak. She started with HMRC, and they moved on to me. Essentially, since HMRC last responded to me (the original document I scribbled notes on), I feel it's right I should go first and just comment on each of their responses.   I'll leave sending that link to them, just in case HMRC then find something against it. I'll just bring it up, and mention the above quotes.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

VCS Spycar PCN PAPLOC now Claimform - no stopping - London Southend Airport ***Claim Dismissed***


Tom Price
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 509 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

Tom, I just found this earlier today that you should add to your Court bundle .

 

It is the Airports Act 1986  which applies to nearly all airports  including Southend airports. 

 

Byelaws are covered at S.63

 (2)Any such byelaws may, in particular, include byelaws—

(d)for regulating vehicular traffic anywhere within the airport, except on roads within the airport to which the road traffic enactments apply, and in particular (with that exception) for imposing speed limits on vehicles within the airport and for restricting or regulating the parking of vehicles or their use for any purpose or in any manner specified in the byelaws;

 

So it is there in black and white.

It is an Act of Parliament that far outranks any stupid VCS sign.

 

And it beggars belief that not only VCS but all other parking companies are unaware of the Act that covers just about every airport in Britain including all the ones covered by VCS. 

 

I think that that part of the Act is is damning that you should try and get the Court to include it in your WS.

You may get some leeway as you are a litigant in person.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes the GDPR breach will be a nice follow up once Simple is seen off in court, that Airports Act being Statute just about kills Simon's pig and all Civil Claims he brought were founded on sand, shame people can't appeal that judgment en bloc, as that indicates egregious misrepresentation by PPC's,

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 all.. I have sent a copy of S63 as Exhibit 18 to the court and asked for it to be included in my Defence as it's an important Act Of Parliament that the Claimant should be aware of :-)

Not sent to VCS as I am waiting for the Court to confirm it's inclusion..

As for the GDPR... I have not mentioned that to the Court or VCS.. will save that for a surprise after..

 

Regards Tom

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice turn of phrase  Tom. Although perhaps it should have been  " that the claimant should have been aware of aware of" or more likely .."that the claimant was aware of".  I am sure that Judge would be grateful were it to be included since it would make his decision that much easier. 

When letting VCS know the you could mention GDPR breach and that ignorance of the Law is not an excuse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sent a copy of EXHIBIT 18 - Airports Act 1986, Part VI Miscellaneous and Supplementary ,Byelaws, 63. Airport Byelaws to the Court & VCS today for inclusion in my WS.

Also asked VCS to confirm receipt of my WS & this addendum so we don't get to the day and they say they never received them.

 

Not had an answer from the Court if they will accept it or not, so I didn't mention that fact..

 

Wanted to mention GDPR breach but I am going to save that for later,

 

Regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi all, just finished my Hearing.. Nothing owed to me by VCS so I WON the case.

 

Mr D from VCS stated he wanted to Appeal, then he withdrew the opportunity. VCS have 3 weeks to appeal so I may yet get a letter.

 

The WS "we" all put together was "Very Informative" the Judge said.

 

What swung the judge was that is was a Stopping Event, not a Parking Event.

 

I didn't make any counter claims as yet.. Will wait to see if an Appeal is forthcoming..

 

Just want to say a Big Thanks to all for your help. I do hope it's finally over. It was pretty Intense for a Layman!

 

Regards Tom

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Andyorch changed the title to VCS Spycar PCN PAPLOC now Claimform - no stopping - London Southend Airport ***Claim Dismissed***

Well done Tom....topic title updated to reflect the outcome.

 

Andy

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

Superb, another tolchocking for Simple Simon, with his no stopping parking events.

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

1 hour ago, Tom Price said:

What swung the judge was that is was a Stopping Event, not a Parking Event.

 

what angle was the judge looking at re: the 'no stopping'?

the fact that no stopping, is not under the RTA, Byelaws, or VCS T&C's...if you get what i mean..which one?

 

or simply that in whatever world...'stopping' cannot be considered 'parking' 

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

I am so pleased that you won. Sometimes you do all the hard work and the Judge picks on just one of the reasons and goes with it. As simple as that. Other times you really have to work at it especially with a Judge who is not as up to speed with differences between stopping and parking. So well done for going there and putting your case.  A well deserved outcome.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, WoodDD said:

Great news!👍👍👍 My case with them is due to next month. It'd be helpful if you could share your court experience and your case no.

 

Thanks!

Hi.. I would like to give you the case number, but I am concerned about Disclosure as this reference if accessed will have all my personal details. Not sure if this would be accessible by anyone but a Judge etc... Hopefully, someone on this site may know..

 

Regards Tom

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for the comments.. I hope to get a transcription of the recording, but I don't know if that's possible. I have asked the Court so will see what comes back. This is an overview and may not be exact wording.. 

 

I'll add the highlights from what I understood.. [both Judge & Mr D were well into the legal jargon].. some of the more technical discussion was lost on me..

 

Opening Statements..

VCS......Events from Incident to Court summons.. pretty much the WS opening

Me........Night time, bad weather, bad visibility, children in danger walking on the road so "Signs" were not very clear

VCS......Pictures on their WS were in daylight. Picture of the car we very blurry due to the rain. VCS agreed it was bad..

Me........Kangaroo Court - Every drop down on the appeal site is an admission of some sort of guilt. Needs to be an "Other" in case your situation doesn.t match

Judge...Asked for clarification on POFA from VCS 

VCS......Explained POFA in his terms and what he understood

Judge...Was it a Parking event?

VCS......No, it was a Stopping event

Judge...Asked VCS who owns the land.. he didn't know so I told him Southend Council owns the freehold of the airport, but it has been leased since 1994 to London Southend Airport Company Limited

Judge...Surprised VCS didn't know that

Judge...Asked VCS if the Contract is relevant?

VCS......Yes, 

Judge...Still not clear

VCS......Quoted VCS v Ward & Idle.. 

Me........That's not in your WS so is it admissible?

Judge...That's not relevant in this case.. he had a quick look.

Judge...Is the land relevant

VCS......No real valid response, referred to VCS contract with the airport.

Me........Why is Mr Wasi the paralegal not here as he may know?

Judge...Section 46 refers to Parking/Waiting.

Me........It all refers to Parking.. and I was not parked or waiting.. ## I expect Simple will see this as a loophole so may change it ##

 

Closing Statements:

Me........VCS are aggressive in all their actions, as you can see by the Letters in their WS.. I also went through all the Arguments at a high level, such as Bye-Laws, Road Traffic Act [Public access etc.., the POFA discussed Parking, not Stopping, PO Box on the Signs, no address.

VCS......Pretty much same as the Opening statement as far as I remember.. 

 

Judge...  

Car was stopped for 30 seconds

Multiple Signs

The Driver "did" enter into a Contract as they entered the airport

But.... Does POFA apply

Needs distinction

Stopped not Parked

Only applies to Parking

Judge referred VCS to Jopson v Homeguard

👍  Defendant wins the case & is not obliged to pay VCS any money

 

Judge to VCS... do you want to Appeal

VCS.. Yes Sir................... but after 20 seconds he changed his mind to No Sir, no appeal at this time.. 

Judge to VCS... you have 3 weeks to appeal if you change your mind.

 

So.. VCS may appeal, but I had a feeling that he may have been tapped on the shoulder and advised to say No.. at the time..

 

 

### As far as I can remember, this is how it went down ###.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Tom, that will be very useful to others in a similar position.

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

Think they would be silly to appeal as a more forensic look at VCS MO and shenanigans could turn round and bite Simon on the bum.

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

@Tom Price

 

Thank you for your note, which is very helpful.

 

Did VCS cite the following cases?

 

1. VCS v Ward

2. Semark Jullien

 

VCS threw the two cases to me in the last minute at my previous hearing. The judge accepted the extra WS and adjourned my case for me to read/defend it. My case is going to be held on 30th March.

 

Thanks!

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi WoodDD.. Neither Case was cited in the VSC WS... however, MR D form VCS threw in VCS v Ward & Idle for the Judge to consider during the hearing. The Judge did not have time to review this. I believe he may have had a quick scan but decided it wasn't relevant at the time.. By not relevant, he didn't elaborate if it was not admissible or anything else..

 

Hope this helps..

 

Regards Tom 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's in post 148.  Read from there to the end of the thread, as there were later comments which would have tweaked bits of the WS.

  • Like 1

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

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...