Jump to content


VCS/ELMS Spy car 2*PCN PAPLOC Now Claimform for 1 of them - 'NO STOPPING' BP Station East Midlands airport


Recommended Posts

I’ve got an appointment for mediation on the 8/6/21 but it says I have to be willing to negotiate on the amount of the claim which I’m not really, what should I do.

 

cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mediation is no use in these cases they assume you owe something so the PPC will want something, should always say No to Mediation, you either owe it or not, not pretend its the Old bazaar in Cairo and haggle over what you are going to pay the fleecer's.

  • Thanks 1

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

  • 4 weeks later...

Hi,

been sent a date for my hearing via a telephone conference.

I need to prepare a witness statement any advice please or do I just tell it as it happened.

Also it says That this case has been listed with another small claim and if both cases are effective then one case will have to be stood out, I’m not sure what this means but they will let me know no less than 7 days before the hearing.

they are asking VCS to provide additional directions in a contractual claim for breach of parking terms and they have until July to do this .

Link to post
Share on other sites

bit of a shame simon can have sight of all your WS but has until 3 days before the hearing to produce the digital bundle, i can see him changing stuff to counter your WS.

 

the dual case hearing bit is simply hoping the other case gets dropped or resolved before the court date, if it doesn't yours might be rescheduled.

 

so keep an eye on 25th july and simon paying £25...

 

 

 

  • Thanks 1

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 1

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow that witness statement is quite a lot to take in, I’ll start with telling my story then look for the relevant parts to fit in and post for you to have a look at. Will it all have to be itemised and exhibited like that is. 
thanks 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it's best to have numbered paragraphs.

 

Points 4, 6, 14 & 15 are no use to you, but the rest can be used almost verbatim.  However, try to take it in and understand the legal arguments about bye-laws, prohibition, not a parking event, etc., as you will have to argue these points if Simon does take you all the way to court.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nutshell is as access roads are covered by Byelaws, and stopping is prohibited, a Parking Event cannot be constructed out of a prohibition, stopping is a Breach of a ByeLaw, so cannot give rise to a Civcil Contract to breach. however, as FTM Dave says study it well

  • Thanks 1

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

Here is a draft copy of my witness statement id appreciate it if someone could have a look and advise me of any additions or changes that need to be made most is copy and pasted from a previous WS as suggested by FTM Dave with the bits I've added that relate to my case.

Thanks in advance

WS Draft.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done.  However, the nature of the beast is now to nitpick and try to improve the WS.

 

See what the other regulars think too, then post up a revised version in a few days' time.

 

1.  In (4.1) I think you should be admitting as little as possible to doing what VCS found naughty.  I'm not saying to lie, just leave out bits the court doesn't need to know.  How about "4.1. On the evening of xxxxxxxx at approximately 00:22 , I arrived at East Midlands Airport to pick up my brother in law. I slowed down as I thought I could see him and then stopped on the main road to pick him up. I then drove out of the airport area along the same road I drove in on spending no more than approximately 3 minutes in the airport area.

 

Later I discovered that at 00:23:13 I was issued with a PCN ticket number VCSxxxxxxxx (exhibit 1) contravention reason: 46) stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited, East Midlands Airport Castle Donnington DE74 2SA. At 00:24:11 (58 seconds later) I was issued with a second PCN, ticket number VCS xxxxxxx. (exhibit 2) contravention reason: 104) stopping to pick up/ drop off in a restricted zone, The Fuel Station EMA Castle Donnington DE74 2SA.

 

However, at no time did I enter the fuel station as stated by the claimant, The photos shown in exhibit 2 do not show me in the fuel station. Therefore any reference to my location and signage within the fuel station are irrelevant.

 

2.  I'm not sure the bit about appeals is very relevant, but if you leave it in don't say the PCNs were increased to £160, the whole point is that the extra £60 is Unicorn Food Tax.

 

3.  The bit about asking for a breakdown of costs is irrelevant and needs to go.

 

4.  The next bits about it not being a parking event, driver/keeper, and the fuel station all need to be moved after (4) and to get their own paragraphs.

 

However, the meat of it is there.  Good work.

 

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

VCS are not noted for their veracity when it comes to completing a WS so can you post it up when you receive it so that we can rubbish it. 

 

Normally I would suggest that you swap "I" for  "the driver" but as you have appealed I assume you have already revealed that you were the driver. 

 

However I have looked at the "contract" that VCS have with Harvest Energy. It is rubbish.

 

First thing is that as land is involved, it should be a Deed and for the deed to be valid it needs a director from both companies to sign and to be witnessed by two other people .  So for a start, VCS have not signed, there are no witnesses and Ian Woodcock is not shown as a director of Harvest Energy.

 

No valid deed -no contract formed.

 

There was no contract offered to you anyway because No Stopping is prohibitive and there can therefore not be a contract between VCS and the motorists. [ As an aside this is an excellent reason for you to claim back the other money you paid. I would  go for breaching your GDPR too since they know they didn't have a contract].

 

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/44   sub section [2] is what you want to read.

 

This should be the first thing on your WS as that should finish it.

 

I am still trying to work out how a petrol station can survive if motorists aren't allowed to stop there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, lookinforinfo said:

I am still trying to work out how a petrol station can survive if motorists aren't allowed to stop there.. 

 

🤣

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

from their reply to your appeal...

 

Dear 
Re: Parking Charge Notice Number .. - Vehicle: ....
Site: The Fuel Station, EMA Post Code: DE74 2SA


Contravention Date: 10/12/2019


We refer to your appeal in respect of the above Charge Notice (CN) received on 21/12/2019.


Having considered the points you have raised and reviewed our records, we are unable to accept your appeal.

 

Our main reason(s) for this decision are as follows:
The signs within the Fuel Station, clearly state "No Stopping", giving clear notice that the land is private property and that a Charge of £100 will be levied if vehicles do stop.

 

The above detailed vehicle picked up in a zone where both are prohibited and the driver became liable to pay that Charge.


In your appeal you have confirmed to us that on the date in question, you stopped your vehicle in the Fuel Station.


A review of our CCTV evidence has confirmed that on the date in question, your vehicle stopped to collect a passenger in the Fuel Station where restrictions apply.

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

no stopping...urm...should the signs not say ...you may not pick up passengers...

 

but how do they know that 5 mins earlier you'd had not already left him at the shop in the garage and was just doing 'shopping' and you went back to get him later.

 

the letter states they have reviewed CCTV footage, then you DEMAND that in your WS.

 

you also need to see where in the contract the landowner states, SPECIFICALLY, that they approve that VCS may review CCTV to discriminate against arriving flight passengers that get picked up outside of their pay to pick-up zone thus losing profit......

 

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

Nice GDPR claim in there when Simon is sent packing with that use of CCTV on his admission

 

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

I’m not jumping the gun but they not only obtained my data from DVLA but also passed it on to Elms legal to harass me and who they have now dumped

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's great work - well done.

 

From a first quick glance there's nothing "wrong" there - however some of the paragraphs need moving round to make the legal arguments flow more clearly.  If no-one looks in this evening I'll do it tomorrow.

  • Thanks 1

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, I've tweaked things just a little bit (the odd typo, the odd word changed to make it flow better, etc).

 

However, I've moved the paragraphs around and given each section a heading to try to make your legal arguments clearer.  There may be more formal ways to phrase the headings, see what the other regulars think.

 

You'll have to change the exhibit numbers.

 

I've added a paragraph 16 in red saying Simon is claiming £50 legal costs yet he is representing himself (with an extra exhibit).

 

I think paragraph 6 needs to be split into two, RTA and bye-laws, and you need to lay it on thick about the bye-laws.  Indeed give the bye-laws their own section.

 

Apologies if I've knackered the lay-out!

 

However, see what the others think too.

WS version 3.pdf

  • Thanks 1

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks good FTMDave, the expansion of the byelaws argument by illustrating how a breach of byelaw cannot lead to a parking event VCS can claim on would be good.  Incidentally, if this is chucked out, would the invoice paid be reclaimable, as like the second one just thrown out is void and unconscionable, so try to reclaim it?  Thoughts DX FTM?

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

I think a serious point is being missed with regards to the deed or contract.

This is from PoFA  2  [1]  giving a breakdown of the descriptions and the one that is important to your case is waht is a relevant contract

 

"relevant contract” means a contract (including a contract arising only when the vehicle was parked on the relevant land) between the driver and a person who is—

 

(a)the owner or occupier of the land; or 

(b) authorised, under or by virtue of arrangements made by the owner or occupier of the land, to enter into a contract with the driver requiring the payment of parking charges in respect of the parking of the vehicle on the land;

 

I am assuming that a contract does exist where a director from VCS has signed but the fact that two witnesses have not signed the document means the deed has not been "validly executed" according to https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/44

 

-and I would include the URL since not all Judges may be aware of contracts and the necessity of correct signatories being present. It follows on from there that as there is no valid contract there can be no contract between VCS and the motorist. 

So even if "no stopping" could form a contract [which it cannot], it is immaterial. There is no valid contract end of.

 

I would then go on to say that a company  completing as many contracts as VCS must know that there is no contract at EMA and so to issue PCNs is bordering on fraudulent.

 

In addition under their CoP they have signed to say that they comply with all Laws and Regulations relating to parking. It calls into question there ability to receive data from the DVLA. As per Lord Neuberger  Parking Eye V Supreme Court

"And, while the Code of Practice is not a contractual document, it is in practice binding on the operator since its existence and observance is a condition of his ability to obtain details of the registered keeper from the DVLA. In assessing the fairness of a term, it cannot be right to ignore the regulatory framework which determines how and in what circumstances it may be enforced".

 

The Judge should throw out the case there and then. It fails one of the first criteria in PoFA. You should be asking for exemplary damages for putting you through all this knowing that they had no contract and no case. And to stop them carrying on the scam.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point lookedinforinfo, needs incorporating in the WS as is fatal to Simon''s case.

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

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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...