VCS ANPR PCN PAPLOC Now Claimform - double dipping - St Mary's Gate Retail Park, S1 4QZ ***Claim Dismissed***

[holmer444]

For PCN's received through the post [ANPR camera capture]

 

please answer the following questions.

 

1 Date of the infringement - 24.12.19

 

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] - 09.01.20

 

3 Date received - 13.01.20

 

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?] N

 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Y

 

6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] N

Have you had a response? [Y/N?] N

 

7 Who is the parking company? VCS (Vehicle Control Services)

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] St Mary's Gate Retail Park Car Park, Sheffield, S1 4QZ

 

For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. Independent Appeals Service (www.theIAS.org)

 

Hi,

bit of a strange one this and not sure what the best way to approach is,

 

the 'offence' is actually two visits to the same car park on the same day,

I can clearly remember the day as it was Christmas Eve and the google location service on my mobile phone tell me exactly what my movements were.

 

I arrived in the car park at 11.10, did some shopping and left left at 11.47.

Later in the day I received a message that a present I'd ordered had been received and I returned to collect it from the particular shop, I arrived back at around 14.30 and left at 14.52.

 

Clearly VCS have used the time of entry from my first visit and the time of exit from my second and assumed I was parked for the duration (which I wasn't),

I haven't appealed as this requires me to complete a field stating whether I was the vehicles keeper, driver or hirer 'when the contravention occurred' which seems like an admission of guilt.

 

I notice the issue date is 17 days after the date of the 'offence' which, but conscious there are 3 bank holidays included in this period so wasn't sure if that was relevant?!

 

Irrespective of the ridiculousness of the parking charge, I'm not convinced I broke any of their 'rules', the total time I was parked was less than the 60 mins permitted (although across two visits) and so I don't think I contravened the rule they say I have (i.e. parked longer than the maximum period permitted).

 

Any advice on how to proceed would be gratefully received.

 

Many thanks

VCS 9.1.20.pdf

[shamrocker]

They appear to be out of time to issue the NTK and it's also a classic case of 'double dipping'. Take a screenshot of your movements from that day and keep it safe somewhere, as it may prove useful later.

 

More comments will follow from other forum members.

[holmer444]

Thank you for taking the time to time to reply.

 

I did wonder if there would be any mileage in making a subject access request to the data controller in the hopes that would mean them sending me pictures of my car leaving the car park earlier that day, but not sure if the SAR would require they send me copies of all the pictures they had of my car?!

[dx100uk]

not worth it.

if simon Renshaw smith want to issue a letter of claim

let him go ahead.

 

he'll lose hands down any court claim.

 

the NTK is out of time

the event encompasses 2 visits.

there is no '1 hours free parking' limit...it will be atleast +2hrs on the originally granted planning permission from the council..and n-one can change that.

 

it will also help you to read these

https://cse.google.com/cse?cx=partner-pub-8889411648654839:3134625398&q=St Mary's Gate Retail Park%2C S1 4QZ&oq=St Mary's Gate Retail Park%2C S1 4QZ&gs_l=partner-generic.12...2930513.2930513.0.2931743.1.1.0.0.0.0.231.231.2-1.1.0.gsnos%2Cn%3D13...0.0...2.34.partner-generic..1.0.0.aogc2b9yHYI

 

dx

 

 

[holmer444]

Hi all, I've received what puports to be a 'Letter before claim' which I've attached (apologies for the delay in getting this on here), having read through some of the other threads I believe that as it's come from VCS and not from one of their 'legal partners' it can be added to the 'ignore' pile, but just wanted to check ?

 

Thanks in advance (and hope you're all staying safe!)

Letter before claim.pdf

[dx100uk]

clearly says letter of claim...

 

time for one of EB's snotty letters.

 

 

[FTMDave]

Yes, once you're at the LBA stage you need to answer, as it's a formal threat to take you to court, and VCS do do court regularly.

 

As dx writes, post up a draft of a snotty letter to ridicule their claim (double dipping due to cameras they bought in a car boot sale, NTK out of time as they can't read a calendar properly, etc.)  The more insulting & abusive the better, so they see you don't take them seriously and have seen through their claim.

[holmer444]

I'm thinking of going with the below, any thoughts or comments are more than welcome.

 

Dear Jackass Jake,

 

I am in receipt of your ‘Letter before Claim’ but fail to see what the cause for action by VCS is against me as the vehicle in question simply wasn’t parked on the site when you claim it was. You’re clearly ‘double dipping’ given that any parking on site would have been carried out in line with your pretend ‘rules’.

 

In addition, your ‘Notice to Keeper’ was dated 9 January, which was 16 days after the date you allege a contravention took place and as I’m sure you know is outside the statutory 14 days allowed.

 

It would appear that all this could be resolved by you investing in some better cameras or improving staff training, although if your staff aren’t able to accurately track comings and goings or master the tricky art of counting to 14, maybe you need some new staff?

 

As there is no cause for action this makes me wonder what reason was given to the DVLA for the accessing of my personal data and so invite you to drop this ridiculous claim  before you spend even more of your money on this by way of settlement of a counterclaim as per VCS v Phillip, Liverpool CC Dec 2016.

 

I look forward to your apology.

 

Yours sincerely...

[brassnecked]

As a belt & braces have you some proof of whereabouts between the 2  parking periods maybe dashcam footage even that shows you leaving the first time. , a reciept from somewhere well away from their car park is useful for later.

[holmer444]

I have screenshots of the Google maps data from my phone which shows that I was in town from 11.16 to 11.47 then drove home, then drove back to town, arriving at 14.33 and leaving for the second time at 15.01, driving home again.

 

So either I was in my car and it wasn't in the car park when they say it was or I was in another car and not driving my car, hence they can only pursue me under keeper liability, which they can't do as their original PCN is more than 14 days after the date they allege the 'contravention'.

[brassnecked]

The location evidence is useful if they did do court at the WS stage.

[FTMDave]

Well done - I think you may be rivalling our resident expert Ericbrother in the snotty letter stakes

 

We normally go for "Dear Simple Simon" (Simon Renshaw-Smith, the owner of VCS).  Did someone called Jake sign the LBA?

 

I would drop "given that any parking on site would have been carried out in line with your pretend ‘rules’" which seems superfluous.  No way will they apologise, up to you if you keep that last line - but hopefully they will crawl back under their stone.

 

Maybe hang on for 24 hours in case of other comments, then send VCS your both barrels (and get a free certificate of posting from the post office).   

[ericsbrother]

Your letter sits well with the sort of response they deserve.

the great advantage of sending such letters is they are evidential so you can make a judge smile when you show you responded to the lba and claim that their actions after that are unreasonable and worthy of a full costs recovery order.

[holmer444]

Thanks all, really appreciate the input, have made some tweaks and planning to go with the version below...

 

Dear Simple Simon,

 

I am in receipt of your ‘ Letter before Claim’ but fail to see what the cause for action by VCS is against me as the vehicle in question simply wasn’t parked on the site when you claim it was, you’re clearly ‘double dipping’ . 

 

In addition, your ‘Notice to Keeper’ was dated 9 January, which was 16 days after the date you allege a contravention took place and as I’m sure you know is outside the statutory 14 days allowed.

 

It would appear that all this could be resolved by you investing in some better cameras or improving staff training, although if your staff aren’t able to accurately track comings and goings or master the tricky art of counting to 14, maybe you need some new staff?

 

As there is no cause for action this makes me wonder what reason was given to the DVLA for the accessing of my personal data and so invite you to drop this ridiculous claim  before you spend even more of your money on this by way of settlement of a counterclaim as per VCS v Phillip, Liverpool CC Dec 2016.

 

Yours sincerely...

[FTMDave]

Looks pretty good to me

 

Get a free Certificate of Posting from the post office.

[holmer444]

Thanks all 

[brassnecked]

Looks good, yes that free proof of posting If he did carry on the AOS short defence could include there is proof the vehicle was elsewhere during the time it was claimed by Simple to be on site.

[holmer444]

Sorry just one more thing, simple Simon is Simon Renshaw-Smith?

 

Just making sure I get the envelope right...

[ericsbrother]

yes, he owns VCS and Excel and often confuses them when it comes to contracts and court claims. He says they are sister companies when the law says they arent.  he claims heknows better than judges and legislators becaue he has superpowers, he is Mr Clampit when he is using his alter ego

[AndyOrch]

Topic open

[holmer444]

Many thanks Andyorch for re-opening the topic and apologies all for reawakening this, but somewhat disappointingly I received a county court claim form this weekend, I was panicking a little until I saw the next letter was one from VCS reminding me I could still pay them and make it all go away....so naturally I'm going to defend.

 

The issue date on the Claim form is 26 October, if I've read the pack (and the various helpful threads on here right), I have 14 days to acknowledge receipt of the form and 28 days to send my defence, which I reckon to be acknowledge no later than Monday 9 November and respond no later than Monday 23 November?

 

I'll post my intended response for comment when I've done a bit more research/reading.

 

Thanks as always

[brassnecked]

Acknowledge it as per the sticky on MCOL

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/393251-received-a-court-claim-from-a-private-parking-speculative-invoice-how-to-deal-with-it-hereupdated-aug-2016/

[dx100uk]

complete the sticky in the above post please:

 

then:

 

pop up on the MCOL website detailed on the claimform.
.
 register as an individual
 note the long gateway number given
 then log in
.
 select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box.
.
 then using the details required from the claimform
.
 defend all
 leave jurisdiction unticked.
 click thru to the end
 confirm and exit MCOL.

 get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors [if one is not listed send to the claimant]

no need to sign anything
.
you DO NOT await the return of paperwork.
you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform [1 in the count]

[FTMDave]

Simon has A LOT of previous for starting court claims - even though he has no intention of actually going to court.

 

It's a numbers game.  It only takes two minutes for VCS to start court action on a computer with their carp cut & paste claims, and it only costs £25.  Presumably enough motorists are terrified of going to court and cough up the money, including the £25 and £60 Unicorn Food Tax that Simon adds.  Then there will be those who have moved or for whatever reason don't defend, so Simon wins by default.

 

However, put in a strong defence and then WS and Simon will often run away.

 

That's not guaranteed of course, you need to prepare everything with the view of seeing VCS in court - and giving them a hammering.

Edited November 2, 2020 by FTMDave
Typo

[holmer444]

Thanks all, please see details below:

 

Name of the Claimant : Vehicle Control Services Limited

 

Claimants Solicitors: Cannot see one stated

 

Date of issue – 26 OCT 2020

 

Date for AOS - 13 November 2020

 

Date to submit Defence - 27 November 2020

 

What is the claim for – 

 

1.The Claim is for a breach of contract for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land.

 

2.The Defendant's vehicle, [registration no], was identified in the St Mary's Gate Retail Car Park on the 24/12/2019 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely parked for longer than the maximum period permitted.

 

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

 

4.The terms and conditions upon entering private land 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.The Claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest. 

 

What is the value of the claim?

Amount Claimed - £160.00

Court fee - £25.00

Legal representative's costs - £0.00

Total amount - £185.00

 

I've logged onto MCOL, completed the AOS and saved a copy. 

 

CPR31.14 completed and printed will take to post tomorrow, presume I request proof of posting as per previous correspondence?

 

Thanks again.