vcs pcn claimform - JLA Liverpool Airport-no stopping ***Claim Dismissed with Costs*** judge said VCS can't enforce no stopping

[FTMDave]

Well, appealing wasn't a great idea, nor was admitting their "breach".

 

However, it's not the end of the world.  This is still a case of prohibition, and especially of bye-laws which trump any nonsense that VCS send out.

 

So just sit back and do nothing ... unless you get a LBA.

 

As you've been reading other threads (well done!) keep an eye on cases where VCS are suing motorists.  They've become very litigious all of a sudden.  Hopefully Simple Simon will either wet himself & run away before the cases, or get a good kicking in court.  Either way you will know what is to come.

 

 

[FTMDave]

23 hours ago, Didusha said:

1. when it goes to court, do I get a say where the hearing is? Or, are  hearings now online?

Hearings have been on-line since the COVID outbreak began, but this week we had a case where the court asked if the defendant preferred a face-to-face hearing or on-line.  In any case, if it's face-to-face, you get to decide which court, not Simple Simon.

 

23 hours ago, Didusha said:

2. In my defence do I need to submit any  evidence, such a copies of the bylaws etc.

Read up on other VCS claimform cases.  The defence is just brief & generic.  The time for full details is much further on at Witness Statement stage.

[FTMDave]

I've just had the most superficial of looks at the contract, and see it started 8 July 2013 ... "for a fixed period of 24 months".  Ho! Ho! Ho!

[FTMDave]

Not at all.  It's not a contract.  It's just some bod saying something. 

 

So they have shown a contract which lasted from 08.07.2013 to 07.07.2015, and then a statement (not a contract) saying they were running the place in 2015. 

 

You got your ticket in 2020!

[FTMDave]

The court order says that you "may send ... a defence in substitution" so you don't have to, but you have the opportunity to do so if you wish.

 

A quick superficial read through VCS's document seems to show they have actually bothered to comply with the court order and give the details the judge ordered.

 

Work calls now but I'll have a proper read through things this evening and get back to you.

[FTMDave]

Right, first the bad bit.  Usually VCS's roboclaims which mix driver & keeper and don't really state what they are suing you for sail through the court system as they staff don't have the time to check everything.  In your case you seem to have found a particularly excellent judge who has picked up on their tripe and made them specify the details properly.  Had you not appealed, you would be home & dry now, as no way would Simple Simon be able to say if they were relying on POFA or not and in which role they were suing you, etc.  Every single one of us on CAG have made mistakes in legal disputes in the past - that's just inevitable when someone has no prior experience - but please learn for the future and if you ever again get one of these invoices never appeal.

 

We deliberately make the defence as generic as possible so it can cover any eventuality.  "4. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant, or broke any such contract" can cover all your remaining points later in your Witness Statement -  

 

No Locus Standi, so no contract entered into;

No planning permission, illegal signage, so no contract entered into;

Prohibition, so no contract entered into;

10-minute grace period so no contract broken;

not a parking event, so no contract entered into;

double recovery.

 

So just my opinion, but on reflection I don't think you need to chance your defence.

 

However, hang on a while and see what the other regulars think - you have till 15 June - as I say we don't normally see a judge demand this amount of detail from the fleecers.

 

[FTMDave]

E-mail the court.

 

Snail mail to Simple Simon.

[FTMDave]

No need to worry.

 

As LFI says, you can e-mail the court their copy.

 

When you use RM for the fleecers, simply get a free Certificate of Posting and you're in the clear.

 

Please post up a draft WS when you're ready.

[FTMDave]

You need more than one argument against VCS (especially as you admitted stopping and outed yourself as the driver).

 

Post 38 lists the points you need to make.

 

Have a look at Alaska 101's WS.  It's the attachment in post 110 here  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/421775-vcs-spycar-pcn-paploc-now-claimform-no-stopping-east-midlands-airport/page/5/#comments  (If it's not in post 110 it'll be a couple of posts above or below, sometimes the post count goes wonky).

[FTMDave]

The point about bye-laws is that any offences should be prosecuted in the magistrates' court and any fines paid to the state.

 

A private company can't just waltz up and decide they are going to enforce the law and levy charges payable to themselves.

 

Don't worry if VCS's WS doesn't turn up, just look at any of their WSs for JLA, all they do is copy & paste anyway.

[FTMDave]

That is great work.  Well done.

 

In (5) cut out "and that there were more than 70 prominent signs around the airport advising motorist of these restrictions".  We don't want to do the fleecers work for them!

 

Regarding (11), that needs to go as they did actually use Elms Legal so are entitled to add the £50 to the claim.

 

The whole of (11.2) needs to go as this is precisely the part of the government's CoP that the fleecers are legally challenging.

[FTMDave]

(10) is not ridiculous at all, well done on all the digging you've done.

 

The situation with the government CoP is a grey area.  Yes, it has been withdrawn, but only because the fleecers are legally challenging it on (a) the amount of their invoices and (b) the Unicorn Food Tax they add on.

 

It's not being challenged on any other points and I reckon you can include the part about stopping for a few seconds in an emergency.  If you can find the section yourself, fine.  I'm travelling at the moment but will be home late on the 30th so could do it then.

 

Great work by LFI re the airport owners.  Make sure you include these points too in challenging the rubbish contract they produced.

[FTMDave]

What you've prepared is superb - take that Simon!

[FTMDave]

To answer your questions.  You should send it to Elms if that is what was written on the claimform.

 

However, I don't know what others think, but as VCS are past masters for lying and using any excuse imaginable to have court cases adjourned and motorists inconvenienced, it might be an idea, if it doesn't cost too much extra, to send VCS a copy too with a covering letter laughing at them for being incapable of deciding if they are dealing with the case or Elms are.

 

Did you decide not to include the government CoP section?

 

Yes, I would include the whole VCS contract.

 

You need to have the WS as you have prepared it, and refer to the evidence as numbered exhibits.

[FTMDave]

Regarding your deadlines, I'm driving all day and won't be able to do any work on this until tomorrow I'm afraid.

[FTMDave]

Is there any difference between the contract they sent you following CPR, and the one Ambreen has included?

 

If you want, you could take a swipe at Ambreen and VCS with a final paragraph -

 

Amreen Arshad is being somewhat disingenuous when she says she "may" be unable to attend the hearing.  I have researched scores of VCS court cases and I cannot find even one where Ms Arshad has ever appeared in court.  The same goes for Mr Mohammed Wali, the other paralegal employed by VCS to write witness statements.  This is particularly remarkable as hearings were by telephone or on-line during the COVID pandemic, with no travelling involved.  It seems that under no circumstances are VCS willing to have their witness statement authors questioned in court.

[FTMDave]

This is magnificent work.

 

The part in green in (3) IMO is superfluous.  It doesn't harm you but isn't really relevant to whether you or VCS are legally in the right.

 

In (4.2) you could add that VCS have attached the same contract in their WS, quote whichever exhibit it is.

 

You jump from a section (5) to a section (9).

 

I'll try & read through your questions and answer them during the morning, if there is still time.

 

I know you're worried about getting the WS to the court and Elms (and maybe VCS) on time.  You could e-mail the lot early afternoon on the 4th.  Yes, I know we've gone on & on & on & on & on (and on some more) about not using e-mail, but you're at the end of the pre-hearing process now, you have VCS's WS, they can't ambush you with lies, there's little they can do to harm you with e-mail at this late stage.

 

 

[FTMDave]

OK, here goes.

 

I think you were right to omit the contract witness statement.  As Ambreen daren't appear, a solicitor will roll up who practises near you, who will know nothing about the case (and will care even less).  No way will they be ambushing you with a letter not included in the WS (which they probably won't even have read). 

 

I think your reference to case law is fine as it is.

 

Remember that you need to refer to your exhibits (in numerical order) in the WS and then add them at the end, like Ambreen has done.  e.g.  I refer to VCS's pants contract (exhibit 1) and also to the PCN which the teaboy worded (exhibit 2).

 

Prepare a document with costs but that is to be shown to the judge at the end if/when you win, it's not to go in the WS.

 

In the part where you mention the signs are small and can't easily be  read, you could add "In her Witness Statement para 23 Ms Arshad goes to great lengths to show that VCS's actions are supported by their trade association, the IPC.  Of course it is of no surprise that a breakaway biased parking association rubber stamps VCS's actions. It is neither here nor there what the IPC considers reasonable or lawful. What is important is what the law in England & Wales considers reasonable and lawful".

 

(BTW she says a sign is as big as a house door. Is that really true?  I've never been to JLA, but I was recently at EMA and I noticed all VCS's signs are quite small, and about half are placed towards the flow of traffic (fair enough) and about half parallel to the pavement where a driver wouldn't see them)

 

Sorry, I missed your (11.1).  At the start you need to make it clear which CoP you're referring to.  How about "Section 7.2 of the government Code of Practice which came out in February 2022, in accordance with the Parking (Code of Practice) Act 2019, defines explicitly ..."

 

You're right it's in the wrong place, make it (10.3).

 

I wouldn't worry about the CoP being half legally challenged and half not, VCS's policy is to pretend it doesn't exist,.

 

E-mail to the court early afternoon on the 4th, obviously click on "Return Receipt", in the subject title put the case number and the names of the two parties, and CC both to VCS and to Elms so there are can be no excuses about receipt.

 

If, belt & braces, you want to hand delver a hard copy to the court, fine.

[FTMDave]

Look at Alaska's point 19.  It was Alaska who first got this idiotic £220 letter and decided to use it against VCS.  In fact, let's enhance Alaska's point -

 

19.  As per another letter received on 31 December 2022 (exhibit XXX), the claimant seeks further costs of £220 incurred in having to instruct a local solicitor to attend the hearing, if I do not accept their offer for settlement.  I look forward to whoever represents VCS at the hearing really making this request.  VCS know full well that legal costs for this sum are capped at £50.  This sum of £220 is a total invention designed to intimidate the Defendant into giving in.

 

Add it to your Double Recovery section in the same position that Alaska did.

 

As you've decided to include the Ibbotson case then you might as well go the whole hog and draw the obvious conclusion: as VCS's representative was reprimanded by the judge and reminded that imprisonment was a possibility, it can be speculated that this is the reason why neither Ms Arshad nor any other VCS employee are ever willing to appear in court.

 

You've got a lot of info on the rubbish signage.  Maybe split all the signage paras off into a new INSUFFICIENT SIGNAGE section?

[FTMDave]

I've finally got round to finding the part of the government CoP you could include.

 

Annex F

F.1

g

 

 

[FTMDave]

As far as I know you don't need to include the PoCs.

 

Can you link to the information you found?

[FTMDave]

The list is extremely generic covering all sorts of cases, so IMO you don't really need to include the PoCs.  However, that said, you lose nothing by including them.

 

I have no idea if the court give you a receipt.  To be on the safe side I'd prepare one myself and ask them to stamp or sign it.

 

What have you decided re the Elms v VCS issue?

[FTMDave]

I'm an overthinker like you - I think your approach is spot on.

 

It'll-be-alright-on-the-nighters lose court cases.

 

Overthinkers win court cases.

 

Always best to prepare too much than too little.

 

 

[FTMDave]

I'm getting repetitive on this thread.

 

Magnificent work

[FTMDave]

Small claims is very informal.  There's no need to know the law inside out.  Just concentrate on rehearsing your main points.

 

I mean, a damn barrier blocked your way.  What were you supposed to do?