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

[FTMDave]

Looks damn good to me - well done!

 

I like the way you have a preamble at the start showing how Simon's claim is pants, and then flesh out the points underneath.

 

I'm not sure you need to go into such detail about the appeals, they are immaterial to the fact that the claim is spurious.

 

Also I've seen other WSs where for clarity the writer has put in sub-headings before the various points such as "No Locus Standi", "Prohibition", "No Keeper Liability", etc., which you could consider.

 

However what you've already prepared is more than enough to blow Simon's case out of the water.

 

 

[brassnecked]

Agree about the appeals FTMDave, they are likely not needed, but they might be woeful for Simple Simon, as they show he is just a greedy git who doesn't follow the rules, if its dealt with by a judge familiar with Simple's shenanigans and is looking for more reason to tolchock him.

[dx100uk]

don't forget at the top to put

 

I am the registered keeper of vehicle XXXX detailed in the Particulars of Claim.

[Tom Price]

Thanks dx.. I have put - ·         I was the registered keeper of vehicle XXXX detailed in the Particulars of Claim.. as the Car was Transferred to a Motor Trade on February 1st 2020 (See EXHIBIT 02]

 

[AndyOrch]

Amended wording of a statement of truth (CPR Practice Direction 22)

2.2 The form of the statement of truth verifying a witness statement should be as follows: “I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.”

 

Andy

 

[Tom Price]

Thanks Andy.. should I add that to the WS?

 

 

[brassnecked]

Yes put the sentence Andy had in bold above your signature.  sign the Court copy but not the one to fleecer's I think

[Tom Price]

Thanks.. Done.. 

[Tom Price]

Hi all, hope you are all staying safe.. I have attached a sample of the exhibits I am gathering.. I wont bother attaching copies of the fleecers letters as we have all seen these before.

 

Not attached: Some still in progress

EXHIBIT 02

EXHIBIT 04a & 04b

EXHIBIT 06

EXHIBIT 09

EXHIBIT 10

 

I have listed EXHIBIT 10 -. Parking Eye Ltd vs Beavis (2015) UKSC 67.. but the fleecers like quoting that on their demands so not sure I should use it.. perhaps better to use something else as an example where they have lost.

 

I have looked at the Southend Airport By-Laws @ https://southendairport.com/corporate-and-community/byelaws

I cant seem to see the date of this, but it does say current bylaws on the above link

 

By-Laws - https://d1z15fh6odiy9s.cloudfront.net/files/sen-byelaws-1983-297c76b8.pdf

 

Let me know what you think,

 

EXHIBIT 01 - London Weather Map @ 22:00 Hrs 16th August 2019 [Time of Alleged Offence]

EXHIBIT 02 - Copy of V5C/3 Transfer of Vehicle to Motor Trader 01.02.2020

EXHIBIT 03 – My 2 appeals against the Parking Charge Notice & Formal Challenge on Second Appeal

EXHIBIT 04a & 04b - Claimant’s appeal rejection letters dated 19/09/2019 & 28/09/2019

EXHIBIT 05 – Copy of Civil Procedure Rule 16.4

EXHIBIT 06 – TBA

EXHIBIT 07 - Copy of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA)

EXHIBIT 08 – Copy of Section 192(1) of the Road Traffic Act

TBA EXHIBIT 09 - Copy of The London Southend Airport Byelaws 19??.. I think 1997 is the latest.

TBA EXHIBIT 10 -. Parking Eye Ltd vs Beavis (2015) UKSC 67

EXHIBIT 11 – Examples of additional charges being considered an abuse of process

EXHIBIT 12 – Copy of Civil Procedure Rule 3.3(4)

EXHIBIT 13 – Formal Challenge to VCS

 

Regards Tom.

 

[honeybee13]

Hi.

 

Well you're certainly thorough.   What would be really helpful would be to put all of your exhibits into a multiple pdf document so that people don't have to spend ages uploading a dozen different documents. If someone's on a phone, they may not want to go through this and so you lose that advice which would be a shame.

 

Our upload guide has details on multi-pdf's.

 

HB

[Tom Price]

Roger that.. thanks for the advice.. 

 

[Tom Price]

Hi all, combined PDF attached. Exhibit 13 has been removed as it was a duplicate.. I have not attached all 14 pages of the POFA Section 4 as it can be found on the Internet.

 

Thanks all.. looking forward to your opinions,

 

Regards Tom

Exhibits

 

 

defendants draft WS.pdf

[dx100uk]

merged all you pdf's together as your full draft ws.

 

just remember this is not due till feb 14th....

you must inc a cover sheet for each exhibit

 

for future readers, now you can see why we say never ever appeal...

the stupid appeal document used from another site before TP came here opened up soo many things that did not need to be addressed until WS stage. ideally after simple simon files his taking advantage of your LiP status.

 

it is worthy to note

simple simons tac on byelaws is slowly changing 

see about post 184 here:

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/416675-vcsbw-pcn-paploc-now-claimform-no-permit-woodside-business-park-peel-investments-birkenhead/page/8/?tab=comments#comment-5074536

 

and although it has been established that the above business park was sold and NOT covered by byelaws...

simon has included byelaws in his latest WS rambling assuming their involvement.. i expect it will evolve again by the time feb comes around.

 

 

 

[Tom Price]

Hi dx.. appreciate that, thanks.....i tried with PDF but failed.. i'll work it out for when I post the completed version on here

 

So.... now do i wait for their WS.. or should I send mine in about Jan 2021. I was hoping to get his first so I can respond to some of the dribble..

 

Regards Tom

[dx100uk]

imho you do not blink first

 

dx

[Tom Price]

Roger that.. cheers buddy

[Tom Price]

Hi all... still waiting for the WS from VCS....... 

[Tom Price]

Greetings.. Well it finally arrived [Via E:Mail today] The long awaited.. and I mean long [50 Pages] VCS Witness Statement.. the Hearing is not until the 26th February, however, I will get this loaded up for all to peruse by Sunday this week.. As you will see, there is a load of Jargon and for a layman, it's pretty intense..

 

I love how that VCS are claiming £220 for a local lawyer, but it would seem Mr Wali [Paralegal no less] will be representing VCS.. 

 

Stay Safe everyone, and keep an eye out for my WS.. coming soon..

[brassnecked]

No doubt it will be excessively  verbose and full of irrelevances. Post up so we can dissect and see where he is trying it on.

[FTMDave]

In post 102 I wrote that I thought you'd written too much about the appeals.  However, I've noticed in all recent WSs of Simon's (of course all, they are cut & paste jobs!) that VCS/Excel go on about their wonderful appeals procedure that the driver "should" use.  So I've changed my mind, if a motorist ignores the appeals procedure it's worth a few lines saying that they'd discovered it's a kangaroo court, and if instead a motirst does use the appeals procedure and fails it's worth stating that shows it's a laughable kangaroo court.

 

Also I've noticed in the parts of Simon's WSs dealing with the Unicorn Food Tax that he states that dealing with legal matters is not part of his business.  Yet that idiot Jake Whatshisname who signs some of Simon's stuff says he runs the VCS/Excel Legal Department!  I'll see if I can dig out an example of Jake's letters.

[Cabman666]

[Tom Price]

Hi All,

 

Apologies for the Quality of the PDF.. I had to Compress edit it as it's 50 pages.. but it's still readable.. these grabbed my attention:

 

Page 1 Claim @ £185.. Not sure if they are going to present the other claim for £220 on Page 49 as the "Paralegal" looks like he is running this Dog & Pony show and may send an Advocate

Page 7 [18] Apparently I am naive

Page 14 [47] The Paralegal may not be able to attend.. 

Page 40 [3] I made a cut & paste error here.. wrong company & wrong amount.. not much I can do about this..

 

I will  also include in my own WS Dave's suggestion on the Kangaroo Court & Jake's letters if found..

 

VCS Witness Statement 20-01-21_V1-Upload.pdfLet me know your thoughts,

 

Regards Tom

 

[brassnecked]

PDF is ok in quality Tom

This is an interesting submission as it calls into question part of their purpose, as in they expect to make money para 42.2

 

"The other purpose was to provide an inmcome stream to enable the
Claimant to meet the costs of operating the scheme and make a profit
from its services, without which those services would not be available."

 

its barefascedadmission they are out to fleece the unwary, of course they would pursue a broken down vehicle and the recovery truck that came to assist most likely under same head as here.

 

 

 

 

[dx100uk]

oh you mean pay for someone in a spycar to travel around taking video of people supposedly stopping for no good reason in your books simon? and make a profit out that...and then claim in your court documents its a CCTV capture...liar!!

 

sort of self funding really with a nice little bit of profit..and self defeating too, scrap the spycar then you don't need to fund it...

[FTMDave]

The quality is excellent Tom.

 

I've just sacrificed half an hour of my life that I will never get back reading that load of bilge from Simon.  A few things.

 

For once Simon doesn't go on about appeals (although the correspondence between the two of you is in his attachments) so it's immaterial how you deal with this aspect.

 

Again, unlike recent VCS/Excel WSs Simon doesn't even try to defend the Unicorn Food Tax, so you can really put the boot in re double recovery.  I didn't find Jake's letter, but I did find  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/419312-vcs-pcn-claimform-no-stopping-in-restricted-zone-bristol-airport-claim-dismissed/page/4/?tab=comments#comment-5081518  Look at the first page of the attachment in post 95.  VCS already employ a Debt & Litigation Manager so obviously see litigation as part of their business and already have an employee who deals with such matters without them having to spend extra money.

 

I love paragraph 31 " ... The Claimant robustly denies that the signage in the car park is of a prohibitive in nature ... the Defendant's vehicle was observed stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited"!!!

 

Your WS is succinct, to the point, and will impress a judge a hell of a lot more than Simon's garbage.  I think it would make it even clearer to the judge if you titled the sections to mention prohibition, POFA non-compliance, bye-laws, double recovery, etc., so the judge can see immediately what you're arguing.