VCS CCTV PCN - No Stopping - Outside entrance to southend airport SS2 6YF (Lay Rep too) ***Claim Dismissed***

[dx100uk]

Write to you about what?Dx

 

what is the status of the claim on mcol?

have you exchanged n180 direction questionnaire s??

 

DX

[lapwing_larry]

Many do quote successful cases to make a key point. However, most cases and wins discussed on this forum are in the County Court. These cases do not set any kind of legal precedent and judges in other cases do not need to pay attention to them. So, the odd case can be useful for choice quotes from a judge, but better to rely on judgements from higher courts e.g. Beavis. 

[nightnajjers]

Yes N180 done

Waiting for a hearing date to be set.  I have not looked on MCOL  but I will look now.

 

Ok the County court not setting precedents,, it  makes sense now.

[lookinforinfo]

Another reason for not quoting cases is  that on the Forum we do not know the names of the motorists nor often who the Judge is so it makes it difficult to reference individual cases.

 

Just for you to be aware, even though the new CoP does not come into force until probably next year much of the reasons behind that is so the parking crooks have time to bring out a whole new slew of paper work and revise their contracts with landowners.

However, the Government is expecting, and has said that the other changes ie abolishing rip off extra charges, should be brought in straight away.

The parking companies don't seem to have realised that yet perhaps because the regulations contain no pictures nor written in different coloured crayons. Some I think are in for a rude awakening. 

[nightnajjers]

I was assuming County Court cases are in the public domain as anyone can sit in on a case, so thought that caggers could just give winning details for future victims.

Hope the change to the  rip off charges are implemented very soon.

 

Your last paragraph did make my evening.

 

Now I have posted again I am sure the next lot of papers will arrive soon. I will be definitely be here for some help when it does.

Thanks

nn

[nightnajjers]

Update on the saga.

Case now set to be heard in Sept. In the meantime VCS sent  an offer to settle, as they are "mindful that the Courts like Litigants to try and resolve their disputes wherever possible, and with that is mind they would accept £192.50 s a reduced settlement charge". It is the second offer they have made under the same circumstances, oddly enough the first one was £185.00 which was rejected.

 

In addition,  If the defendant  "fails to accept our offer we will bring this letter to the courts attention upon the question of costs in order to seek  further costs of £220 incurred having to instruct a local solicitor to attend the hearing in conjunction with the amount claimed on the Claim Form".

 

 

 

 

[brassnecked]

That letter is now standard VCS procedure, thereaten the extra £220 costs if you don't cave and agree to their "offer" to settle that cannot be granted in Small Claims Track, its an overt frightener, and will be useful in your Witness Statement, think they have beed pulled up on that one before.

[FTMDave]

Yep, it was Cagger @Alaska101 who hoisted Simon with his own ...

 

Alaska101 got the same letter which was obviously full of lies as no way would Simon really ask the court for those costs given he knows full well that legal costs are capped at £50 at small claims.  So it was Alaska101 who put the letter in their WS thus showing Simon to be a total liar to the judge!  We've used that idea ever since. 

[nightnajjers]

 I did reply and reject the first "offer"  and said, bearing in mind the Court's  favouring  litigants to settle, that I would settle for £185.00 payable within 14 days and  further If they did not bring the letter to the Court's attention I most certainly would. 

 

Is there any point in answering the last "offer"?

[brassnecked]

No best ignore it and put the letter as exhibit in a Witness Statement, for the false costs.

[dx100uk]

god dont ever reply to them...

dx

[nightnajjers]

ok thank you

[honeybee13]

Thread reopened.

 

HB

[nightnajjers]

Thank you for reopening

Hello

The case is next month for the above VCS Claim .

I have prepared what I can of a witness statement, but without sight of the VCS statement it is diffiult to know exactly what to include.

I am hoping I can just adjust what I have done so far when the VCS statement arrives.

I am sure I have waffled and repeated and made errors. So I would greatly appreciate some help, advice, corrections, adjustments, with what I have got so far.

I am not sure about the last paragraph under the ??????? marks. Is there anything to back this up?

Thank you

 

Defendants WS.pdf

[lookinforinfo]

Esken - London Southend Airport

SOUTHENDAIRPORT.COM

---

Our parent company.

www.southend.gov.uk/common-projects/london-southend-airport#:~:text=Southend%20Council%20owns%20the%20freehold,subsidiary%20of%20the%20Stobart%20Group.

 

The question to ask is -where is Southend airport's permission from Esken/Stobhart to enter into contracts on their own? put them to strict proof.

 

You have put a lot of effort into your WS-well done. Now hope that VCS send their WS to you in time for it to be critiqued since it will contain lies, deflection and total rubbish. They are usually a good laugh too.

[nightnajjers]

Hello

Thank you for the extra info. I understand the landowner part now. I will include it in a suitable place. Thank you for the well done. I have spent so much time reading all the posts on here and especially  ones with VCS.  The time I have spent so far in the research and WS far outweighs the original £60. Rip off.  As long as the Parasites lose I don't care.  So nice to have the extra knowledge and support from you all. 

Thank you     

[lookinforinfo]

In your headline to your thread you said you were ticketed outside the entrance to the airport and yet you haven't stated that in your WS. Had they ticketed you outside the airport that would be a strong indication that they had no right to ticket  you.

[FTMDave]

The individual points you have made in your WS are superb.

 

However, you jump from one argument to another and back again.

 

Look at Lazy farmer's WS at post 87 here (sometimes the post count goes a bit wonky, if it's not at post 87 it'll be a couple of posts above or below)  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/441301-vcs-spycar-pcn-paploc-now-claimform-no-stopping-bristol-airport/page/4/#comments

 

You need to group the legal arguments under headers, then number the paragraphs, so the judge can easily see what arguments are being put forward.

 

Have another go at putting the individual paragraphs under the right legal heading.

[nightnajjers]

Hello.

Lookinforinfo,  The entrance to Southend Airport referred to the Pedestrian entrance which can be accessed from the Highway.

FTM that was the part I was having trouble with as some points seem to overlap into each other.  I did a list of basic defence points as a quick reference so that anyone reading it could just turn to the point of interest to them . I will have another go as you suggest.

thank you

[lookinforinfo]

Nightnajjers are you saying that your car was stopped on the highway, outside of the airport complex with no signage there from VCS?

 

If so, you should mention that strongly in your WS.

[brassnecked]

If what Lookedinforinfo is correct, VCS are on a very sticky wicket so definitely  put in WS that you were stopped on land outside the control/jurisdiction of VCS.

[nightnajjers]

Good morning.

The road is definitely a Public accessed area subject to the RTA. 

The old google images of the accessed area show one or two signs as you drive in.

Not sure what there is now as I have not been back to check.

Any signs are not obvious to a driver on a foggy dark deserted winter evening. 

If you view Google images of the Airport there is a pedestrian crossing between entrance to the Airport and the exit from the Railway Station

. Sorry, I tried and failed to upload a screenshot of the area.  

SS2 6YF

[nightnajjers]

Hello

My days work, another try at the WS.  I hope it will nearly do as there is not much time left to submit it.

 

 

Defendants WS V2.pdf

[FTMDave]

What you've prepared is very, very good.

 

You have sorted out the order of things superbly.

 

However, the nature of the beast is I will now ignore the 99.9% which is fine and concentrate on the other 0.1%!

 

In 3.4 after "It is incredulous to imagine that a driver should be penalised for stopping under such conditions" you could add "yet this is what the Claimant has in the past done, for example on 26 July this year the Claimant issued a court claim against a driver who had stopped to avoid murdering a pedestrian who had stepped out in front of the vehicle".  This is actually true, see southwestram's threads.

 

At the end of page 8 cut out "forthcoming".  The government CoP came out in February.

 

I would also cut out the first paragraph of page 9 "The new Parking Code of Practice is not in force ..."  Don't do the fleecers' work for them.

 

In fact your whole Section 6 could easily be expanded, with minimal work as the fleecers always include Unicorn Food Tax.  Look at the ABUSE OF PROCESS section in the WS in post 87 of Lazy Farmer's thread (sometimes the post count goes wrong, if it's not at post 87 it'll be a couple of posts above or below)  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/441301-vcs-spycar-pcn-paploc-now-claimform-no-stopping-bristol-airport/page/4/#comments

 

Also include points 11 & 12 in the same WS.

 

Obviously things will have to be fine tuned when the fleecers' WS arrives.

[nightnajjers]

Thank you for your help.   I have incorporated your suggestions and made a few more changes, which may or may not be useful. I hope their WS statement arrives soon or I will have to post  mine without seeing theirs. To save boring you all to death, I will put up the revised WS after theirs arrives