Jump to content


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


Recommended Posts

:rockon:

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

He's used the old try both hats to sue keeper, Or driver and added the Unicorn feed tax that the OPS judgment at Lewes CC ruled was abuse of process.

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

Entering the car park is not the acceptance of their terms. If its a pay carpark  then the payment is the acceptance. If there is no charge to park, then staying for longer then 15 minutes or so would be the acceptance.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies for the silence, unfortunately I have one of those jobs that is busier in the current climate. I've done a fair bit of reading and have constructed the following which I was proposing to submit as my defence:

 

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

 

2. It is denied that the Defendant parked continuously in St Mary's Gate Retail Park Car Park at the times mentioned in the Particulars. The Claimant is put to strict proof of the same.

 

3. It is denied that the Claimant has complied with Schedule 4, Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, as the notice to keeper was issued by post, paragraph 9, sub-paragraph (5) allows the claimant 14 days to deliver to that address. The issue date on the notice to keeper was 9 January, 16 days after the alleged contravention occurred.  

 

4. It is denied that the Claimant entered into a contract with the Defendant. 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 simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the carpark 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.

 

5. The Claimant has failed to show, upon request under CPR 31.14, any authority or agency to enter into contracts with the public by way of an assignment from the proprietor to do the same and to make civil claims in their own name.

 

6. The Defendant contends that the Claimant has no authority or agency to do such therefore there can be no claim.

 

7. The Claimant has failed to show, upon request under CPR 31.14, any evidence of planning permission for installation of cameras and signage under the Town and Country Planning Act 2007.

 

8. 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."]

 

Wasn't entirely sure if paragraph 4 or paragraphs 5-7 (or both) were a little superfluous, but I tend to be a bit 'belt and braces' at the best of times so comfortable removing if folks don't feel they add much/anything. 

 

One question I did have - is it best to file a defence early, right at the death or does it not really matter?

 

Any and all comments are gratefully received. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please wait for the experts to comment, but to me that reads more like a Witness Statement than a defence, although it could come in useful later.

 

Defences are normally short and don't give away too much detail in case the PPC can use that against you.

 

Have you looked at Success threads here for defences that people have used?

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

just tighten 4-7 into one sentence whereby you atleast mention authority, signs etc, don't expand upon what might be 'wrong' 

thats for the WS.

 

dx

 

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

Thanks both, how about:

 

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

 

2. It is denied that the Defendant parked continuously in St Mary's Gate Retail Park Car Park at the times mentioned in the Particulars. The Claimant is put to strict proof of the same.

 

3. It is denied that the Claimant has complied with Schedule 4, Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, as the notice to keeper was issued by post, paragraph 9, sub-paragraph (5) allows the claimant 14 days to deliver to that address. The issue date on the notice to keeper was 9 January, 16 days after the alleged contravention occurred.  

 

4. It is denied that the Claimant entered into a contract with the Defendant and furthermore as the Claimant has failed to show any authority or agency to enter into contracts with the public or any evidence of planning permission for installation of cameras and signage the defendant contends that the Claimant has no authority or agency therefore there can be no claim.

 

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.]

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...