VCS/DCB(L) multiple pcn claimform - Smyth Street Pay and Display Car Park Wakefield WF1 1ED.

[Zeppdad]

Thanks @dx100ukthe images are quite grainy but I'll get them up later. I just wanted to check about defence - and the standard 3 -5 line (and @FTMDave's suggestion of a defence- above dated Wednesday @ 21.50).

 

Will this be the only defence (and information) I'll be entering?

 

It just seems rather short in comparison to other's I've read elsewhere (e.g. Coupon-mad's suggestion here

 

(link removed - dx)

[dx100uk]

god no never play your cards until forced too!

[Zeppdad]

Brilliant- Thank you. 

 

Images from Myparking charge for the 3 extortions attached below. 

 

Quick update; after nothing from DVLA for weeks, I emailed them ([email protected]) yesterday; 

'can you please confirm that you have received my query sent 13 January 2021 with regard to a Subject Access Request for my vehicle XXXX in 2017? Can you please confirm who applied for my data in that year. This is currently a legal case in a county court and DVLA may be called. Can you please confirm when you can provide me with this request for information. Many thanks in advance.'

 

Received email response this morning;

Good morning, Your request was completed today and the information has been sent to you in the post.

Kind regards, Subject Access Request (SAR)

 

Hope this helps anyone else. 

 

Also emailed VCS Data Protection officer yesterday requesting ALL the info they had accessed the vehicle. Received an 'Auto Responder' email-  'If you are making a Subject Access Request (SAR) for copies of data that we hold or may hold about you, then we acknowledge your request and will process within the allowed time frame of 1 calendar month. We may be required to contact you for further information or to verify your identity and if so this will mean our time to respond is taken from the time you provide the additional information or proof of identity.' 

 

underlined by me; Abusing the system for their own ends. Irrespective of this, the DVLA info will be interesting to read. 

 

Just back to working on a draft defence...

VCS.compressed.pdf

 

Five downloads of the attached docs...would be nice to know who has downloaded and any feedback would be welcome. 

 

 

 

[dx100uk]

any tarmac graffiti on private land is purely that..

[Zeppdad]

First go at a defence. Thoughts welcome 

VCS First Defence draft 020221.compressed.pdf

[dx100uk]

Post as text please

[Zeppdad]

As follows; 

 

 

1. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question but liability is denied. The Defendant was not the driver at the time and no keeper liability has been created under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

 

2. It is denied that the driver at the time entered into any contract with the Claimant as the car park is managed by a different company.

 

3. It is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of any contract with the Claimant.

 

4. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by inventing three spurious sums, each of £60.

 

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.

 

Statement of Truth

I believe that the facts stated in this defence are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

Defendant’s signature:

 

 

My question; is it enough? 

[FTMDave]

It's more than enough.  (5) is enough in itself - you deny all their claim.  (3) is enough in itself - it covers you not entering a contract (if you don't enter a contract you can't break it) and it covers you entering a contract but not breaking it.  If this does get to court you'll have ample opportunity to flesh everything out in your Witness Statement later on.

 

You don't need the "Statement of Truth" bit at the bottom.

 

It's not of vital importance, but I'd move (2) up as this is the point that separates your case from the usual VCS ones and may persuade Simple Simon it's best to chuck in the towel.  So -

 

1.  The Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question.

 

2.  It is denied that the driver at the time entered into any contract with the Claimant as the car park is not managed by the Claimant.  It is managed by a different company.

 

3.  The Defendant was not the driver at the time and no keeper liability has been created under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

 

4.  It is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of any contract with the Claimant.

 

5.  The Claimant is attempting double recovery by inventing three spurious sums, each of £60.

 

6.  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.

 

If nobody else objects this evening, file it tomorrow.

 

At the same time go along to the post office and send off dx's letter in post 14, with a free Certificate of Posting.  The letter will turn up in Sheffield after the defence has been filed and Simple Simon might realise he's got a thankless task on his hands and discontinue.  Of course being greedy & stupid, with three tickets involved, he may not, but it's worth a try.

[Zeppdad]

many thanks @FTMDave very appreciated 

[Zeppdad]

Quick Question;

 

on MCOL- 'do you wish to make a counterclaim?'- suggestions. Should I do this?

[honeybee13]

Almost certainly not,  but please wait for other forum members to comment.

 

HB

[dx100uk]

no!!

 

dx

 

[FTMDave]

Before I came across this site I would have said "Yes", having counter claimed myself in the past.  However the regulars here taught me it would be a bad strategy.

 

At the moment the aim is to get Simple Simon to discontinue. 

 

Say you counter claim.  VCS want to discontinue.  VCS know that if they discontinue then your counter claim will proceed and they are bound to lose a vast sum of money in court.  Inevitably they won't then discontinue.

 

If you want revenge against Simon then there are other ways, concentrate first on batting away this claim, then later on you could sue VCS for breach of GDPR for example.  

[Zeppdad]

Thanks everyone. defence response filed. No counterclaim. Let's see.....

[Zeppdad]

Response from DBL re: CPR 31.14 request 

DBL Response CPR31.14 Redacted pdf.compressed.pdf

[dx100uk]

quite std letter.

[lookinforinfo]

Means they have some things missing and also now cannot rely on other things that may want to show.

Consequence of failure to disclose documents or permit inspection

31.21 A party may not rely on any document which he fails to disclose or in respect of which he fails to permit inspection unless the court gives permission.

You do have the right to object to their request for permission as they failed to provide it in time. If the Judge does agree then you can ask for an adjournment while you study the content and be allowed to add to your defence should it be necesssary after reading what they produce.

[dx100uk]

Cpr 31:14 is simply a request they dont have to respond and other than p'haps a mention in your ws, is not an issue.

 

they must however disclose everything they intend to rely upon in their witness statement at the disclosures stage if the claim progresses that far.