Backdoor VCS PCN - Berkeley Centre Shefffield.

[FLASH83]

Morning,

 

I was hoping to obtain to advice on a CCJ I have only been recently made aware of.

 

- The CCJ was issued in 04/2019, in which I only found out about this via a Debt Recovery Letter.

- It's in relation to a NTK from 11/2018, issued by VCS at Berkeley Centre in Sheffield. The fee was £60 raising to £100 if not paid within 14 days.

- The NTK was issued 12 days after the date of the alleged offence.

-  To obtain the above information I had to SAR VCS as the NTK was sent to a previous address (my error and will explain below).

- Apart from the above I have had not liaised with VCS regarding this.

- It is for a 73 minute stay. It is an hour for free and then £1 after this hour (which you have to pay upfront which I find bizarre and a way of profiteering).

 

I know there are quite a few really good threads regarding VCS and Berkeley in which I will look to use information to pull together a defence. I am aware I need to write a WS in addition to this, and a NE244 form to apply to have this set aside. I have a few concerns around this though.

 

As mentioned I made an error where I didn't register my car to the correct address hence never seeing the NTKs.

I updated my Driving Licence with my parents address in July 2018 as I had split up with a long term partner and was moving address quite frequently so felt this was stable enough to alter my driving licence to.

 

Mistakenly I thought this would automatically update my vehicles to this (my parents) address however it didn't so my car was registered to a house I sold in Oct 2017. Unfortunately my father became terminally ill and due to this I took my eye off the ball with this and then found out I needed to update my V5Logbook so did this and sent it out to the DVLA on 1/4/19. DVLA updated this on the 5/4/19.

 

CCJ papers were sent on the 3/4/19.

Obviously quite unfortunate because if the Courts issued the papers a week later then they most likely would have had the right address.

 

I am really concerned that a judge when assessing the N244 may say I am at fault re the wrong address and reject my application for setting the CCJ aside

- not sure what others think?

 

It also concerns me that I have registered licence and my car to my parents and not my address however as stated this was stable.  

I did think that I could write to VCS and state I am appealing the CCJ with or without there consent to see if they will consent this (unlikely I am sure)?

 

In terms of the defence I was thinking along the lines of;

- not the driver

- not entered in to a contract

- signs unclear as it says excel however VCS pursue

- Grace periods - the driver was 12 minutes after the 60 minute free period

- not applied for appropriate planning permissions for signage with local council

- old contract states its free for 2 hours not 1 hour. 

 

Obviously pulled quite a lot of the above from some other threads.

Is there anything obvious people think I am missing?

 

Would I include all/everything in my defence statement for the N244?

I am also going to write to MP (not sure if its worth) to hopefully get some additional support.

 

Thank you in advance. 

[dx100uk]

you will have a very hard time in setting this aside as you have no valid reason why you didn't received the Claimform.

the rest is not important at this stage.

 

might be cheaper to simply pay it, the sum om the judgement CCJ that is not anything more.

 

Topic title amended

 

[FLASH83]

Thank you for the response dx100uk, much appreciated.

 

Understand the fault is with myself however surely I should have the right to defend against this invoice. I felt an argument to state that they didn't try very hard to ensure my address details were correct, considering if they contacted the DVLA they will have both  my licence and V5 at different addresses. I have SAR the DVLA to see what information and when it was requested on this point.  

 

I also believe that paying it now doesn't make it go away and therefore has no impact on my credit rating, and therefore will make it difficult for me to obtain credit for 6 years.

 

Thanks again for the advice

[FTMDave]

Which was the date the court ordered you to pay the CCJ by?

[FLASH83]

The letters were issued on the 3/4/19 and the payment date was by the 29/4/19 (apologies I missed this out).

 

A timeline would look like this.

 

1/4 - I sent off V5C to DVLA with new (parents) address

3/4 - CCJ papers issued to old address

5/4 - DVLA updated address

29/4 - CCJ issued

 

As mentioned previously the DVLA always had my parents address for the Driving Licence, just not the car unfortunately.  

 

Thanks

[FTMDave]

You've obviously done a massive amount of reading other threads here - well done!  If only everyone would self help it would make our lives a hell of a lot easier.

 

The reason I asked the "pay by" date is because, even if you pay the CCJ now, it will stay on your credit file for six years, so there's no advantage to you in giving Simple Simon any money.

 

It depends if you want to go for the set aside.  We have a poster called Ericsbrother who has had recent personal experience of a set aside hearing and is of the opinion that courts very rarely refuse them.  Have a read of this thread  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/421087-vcsexcelelms-default-ccj-no-stopping-pcn-bp-garage-east-midlands-airport-de74-2sa-set-aside-telephone-hearing-help/?tab=comments#comment-5049086  Here the OP got it wrong a hell of a lot worse than you, but it still going for a set aside, with an early-June hearing date.  As that is quite soon maybe you could hold fire for a couple of weeks and see how this hearing goes.

[FLASH83]

Thank you FTMDave - had to do plenty of research just to get my head around all of this! and how the likes of Simple Simon can try to get away with this!

 

Yes exactly my thinking in terms of paying off the CCJ - it doesn't benefit me now and only him!

 

That's great advice - thank you, I will keep tabs on what happens there and use that for a later steer! What I will do is write to my MP in the mean time, and will also write to the landlord too complaining about this.   

 

Thanks again.

[brassnecked]

Wonder if there's any merit in looking at Simple's shenanigans in the Berkley Centre and his RobOclaims in light  of that Judgment posted up by Shamrocker?   That judgment condem's the extra fees Unicorn Food tax as legally repugnant and deliberate abuse of process. That place is a cash cow for VCS.  I would hold fire as FTMDave suggests, as it can't do further harm.  Do you have the Particulars of Claim that VCS submitted now, might be worth Phoning Northampton Bulk centre for the POC that they submitted .

 

Might see what he has added in Unicorn Feed tax to the claim, as if sued as Keeper, can't ask for the £60, only the £100 or whatever.

[ericsbrother]

dont agree that you will have a hard time getting a set aside, you get it almost automatically as long as you have some sort of defence to the original claim and that defence doesnt have to be bullet proof, just not hopeless or frivolous.

 

So you have read up on VCS at this site and you need to get piccies of the sigange there, either your own or some lifted from another source that are contemporary to the time of the claim.

 

Now also read up on Simon renshaw-Smith and Excel parking and look at the signs carefully and see who you would have entered a contract with at the time.

 

So get your evidence sorted so you have something to show at the set-aside that you have a good prospect of success and the set aside will be yours and possibly a warning as to costs to VCS.

 

Now this arises because you will have to pay  for the hearing and if you get the set aside and successfully defend their claim you get that money back plus your other costs for the rematch.

 

That the parking co's often do is agree to a rematch as long as they are not liable for your costs

 

many people go with that just to clear their credit files not realising  that they have an almost cast iron winning case if they only held their nerve a little longer

 

so my advice is to not ask them but file the paperwork first and then let them know you will be after them and see if they volunteer to the court that they will drop the matter altogether if you dont ask for costs.

 

the argument about them not trying hard enough to find you is a specious one as it didnt apply at the time of the incident

 

but you may be in luck as the rules on litigation addresses changed about that time so they may have been obliged to ensure they had the right address.

 

I can understand you not getting the DVLA bit right but why didnt you get your post forwarded by RM for 6 months after moving?

 

I know hindsight is a marvellous thing but anyone else reading this thread should sit up and take notice, it saves an awful lot of bother as parking co's used to do this sort of thing on purpose

[dx100uk]

Slam dunk win if we can get ahold of this supposed contract that shows 2 hrs free parking??

 

 

[FLASH83]

1 hour ago, brassnecked said:

Wonder if there's any merit in looking at Simple's shenanigans in the Berkley Centre and his RobOclaims in light  of that Judgment posted up by Shamrocker?   That judgment condem's the extra fees Unicorn Food tax as legally repugnant and deliberate abuse of process. That place is a cash cow for VCS.  I would hold fire as FTMDave suggests, as it can't do further harm.  Do you have the Particulars of Claim that VCS submitted now, might be worth Phoning Northampton Bulk centre for the POC that they submitted .

 

Might see what he has added in Unicorn Feed tax to the claim, as if sued as Keeper, can't ask for the £60, only the £100 or whatever.

 

Thank you Brassnecked, I'll liaise with the NBC to see what the POC was - I hadn't thought of this.

[FLASH83]

59 minutes ago, ericsbrother said:

dont agree that you will have a hard time getting a set aside, you get it almost automatically as long as you have some sort of defence to the original claim and that defence doesnt have to be bullet proof, just not hopeless or frivolous.

 

So you have read up on VCS at this site and you need to get piccies of the sigange there, either your own or some lifted from another source that are contemporary to the time of the claim.

 

Now also read up on Simon renshaw-Smith and Excel parking and look at the signs carefully and see who you would have entered a contract with at the time.

 

So get your evidence sorted so you have something to show at the set-aside that you have a good prospect of success and the set aside will be yours and possibly a warning as to costs to VCS.

 

Now this arises because you will have to pay  for the hearing and if you get the set aside and successfully defend their claim you get that money back plus your other costs for the rematch.

 

That the parking co's often do is agree to a rematch as long as they are not liable for your costs

 

many people go with that just to clear their credit files not realising  that they have an almost cast iron winning case if they only held their nerve a little longer

 

so my advice is to not ask them but file the paperwork first and then let them know you will be after them and see if they volunteer to the court that they will drop the matter altogether if you dont ask for costs.

 

the argument about them not trying hard enough to find you is a specious one as it didnt apply at the time of the incident

 

but you may be in luck as the rules on litigation addresses changed about that time so they may have been obliged to ensure they had the right address.

 

I can understand you not getting the DVLA bit right but why didnt you get your post forwarded by RM for 6 months after moving?

 

I know hindsight is a marvellous thing but anyone else reading this thread should sit up and take notice, it saves an awful lot of bother as parking co's used to do this sort of thing on purpose

 

Thank you very much for all the suggested advice ericsbrother.

 

I think I am worrying too much that a judge may look at the address issue as my fault albeit I have found out from the SAR that they only tried to search for my address once a few days after the proposed contravention.

 

I have the photos already of signage. Clear as mud really - the one on the entrance states 'Excel Parking Services control and manage this car park' with no mention of VCS.

Then another one within the car park has Excel Parking in big letters on it, however small print states 'Entering a contract with VCS'.

 

But I'll continue to get further evidence as you suggest, and then start to draft up a witness statement and once submitted inform them after as you suggest.

 

Yes hindsight is wonderful as you state and would strongly recommend people don't make the same mistakes. Unfortunately lots of family issues including my late fathers health took my focus - not an excuse but certainly a way of learning.

 

 

 

[BankFodder]

In order to get set-aside, not only do you have to show that you didn't receive the court papers – but also that if you were allowed to put in a defence, that you have a good chance of success at trial.

Although it is remiss that you didn't change your address – the fact is that you didn't receive the court papers. The second limb is, in my view, more important – that the judgement against you was unfair because you could succeed at trial.

The judges are required to do justice. This is the prime objective – CPR 1

 

If you can get the information together to prepare a draft defence that we could have a look at. If you submitted that as part of your set-aside application then you would have a good chance of getting it set-aside.

You should certainly look at the case which is posted this morning by Shamrocker

 

Because you might well find that there are some useful points in it – or in the cases which have been referred to by the judge.

[BazzaS]

6 hours ago, BankFodder said:

In order to get set-aside, not only do you have to show that you didn't receive the court papers – but also that if you were allowed to put in a defence, that you have a good chance of success at trial.
 

CPR 13.3 (1) (a) doesn’t refer to a “good chance of success”, but rather that

 

“the defendant has a real prospect of successfully defending the claim”

 

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part13#13.3

 

”real prospect” is a lower required standard than “good chance”

 

Edited May 18, 2020 by BazzaS

[dx100uk]

mentioned in anniebattlemums thread wasn't it..??

the is a relevent contract that says min 2hrs free for that time period.

get it and you are home

[BankFodder]

10 hours ago, BazzaS said:

CPR 13.3 (1) (a) doesn’t refer to a “good chance of success”, but rather that

 

“the defendant has a real prospect of successfully defending the claim”

 

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part13#13.3

 

”real prospect” is a lower required standard than “good chance”

 

 

Yes, you're right

[FLASH83]

Thank you Bankfodder - I'll get on it at the weekend and hold you to that offer of looking at a draft (be kind).

I've made a note to look at the Shamrocker thread in detail.

[FLASH83]

19 hours ago, dx100uk said:

mentioned in anniebattlemums thread wasn't it..??

the is a relevent contract that says min 2hrs free for that time period.

get it and you are home

 

Yes it is.

I think I need to look into the contract point a little more

as I think there was an updating of contracts in Sept 18 whereas my charge was subsequent in Nov 18,

so unfortunately I wouldn't be bound by the old one anniebattlemums is referencing. 

 

That said (I need to double check this)

I think the new contract references the company as Excel and not VCS,

therefore VCS have no right to issue a CCJ against me. 

 

Once I get hold of this contract then I will confirm.

[brassnecked]

Simple Simon usually screws up which company head he has on when issuing claimforms,