Jump to content


VCS/ELMS PCN PAPLOC now Claimform - residential - Headford Mews, Sheffield, S3 7XL


Recommended Posts

Here is the WS again.  in blue I've added some phrases to clarify or beef up some points, and made some suggestions.

 

What you've prepared is superb, it just needed to be put in the right order.

 

WITNESS STATEMENT(3).pdf

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

Again, the points you had prepared were excellent, they just needed to be grouped into a logical order.

 

The WS will probably need just about an hour's work to finish.  It's just a matter of (a) adding the points the regulars have suggested from post 142 onwards and (b) redoing the numbering as I've royally knackered that for you :sorry:l

 

I've just added another couple of points re Supremacy of Contract and Absent Ambreen.

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

I have realised that the signs I was referring to were on Google maps dated 2015. And while the signs may well have been updated by  VCS nevertheless the signs did include the Clearway sign which relates to the Road Traffic signs. That does not give VCS the right therefore to penalise motorists on non relevant land.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well spotted lookedinfor info, Clearway sign trumps anything VCS might add.

  • 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

thank you for above but sadly i have no idea what that means, even after googling it

 

FTMDave, thanks , ive just about got it cracked however this confuses me

(Quote the persuasive cases BN posted about in post 164. Include the pages from the Parking Prankster's blog as exhibits)

 

I have no proof that excel sent the first ticket, and im confused about the parking pranksters blog

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

a private parking company cannot put up nor enforce clearway signs,

 

clearway signs can only be erected by the owner of the land and enforced under any relevant road traffic regulations that cover them or the relevant airport byelaws they have introduced.

 

no stupid parking contractor regardless to the contract wording can ever be a traffic regulatory authority.

 

 

 

 

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

IMO the Excel argument is probably the weakest part of your WS but it's the truth so still include it.  You've beefed it up by adding how Excel have refused to reply to your SAR, as have I by including how VCS's solicitors sent you all the documentation except mysteriously the VCS PCN.  However, I would guess that a judge would decide it's more likely than unlikely that you made a mistake and not consider this point.

 

But it doesn't really matter.  You have about a million other points going for you and you only have to convince the judge on one and then it's curtains for Simon.

 

One of your aces is Supremacy of Contract, especially as you included it in your defence (good work).  Ambreen "should" have made up lies to counter this but as VCS do everything on the cheap she's been too lazy to read your defence properly and hasn't addressed the issue at all.  As you have her WS first you can go to town on her!  You need to quote "C8HW3P0T – UKPC v Miss B, before District Judge Jones, 12/05/2017" using the legal term "persuasive case" and state that in this case the judge found that the person occupying the property had moved in way before the PPC got involved and their tenancy agreement gave them every right to use their parking space as they wished.  Then in the persuasive case "C8HW2E9Q – UKPC v Miss C, Reading before District Judge Harrison, 12/07/2017" the judge found that the tenant could derogate parking rights to visitors.  Print out the articles BN found  https://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2017/05/ukpc-lose-residential-case-will-vicim.html  and  https://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2017/07/ukpc-lose-residential-case-tenant-can.html  and include them as exhibits.

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

Those cases should indicate that the VCS case is absolute pants.

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

  • 2 weeks later...

By royal mail  post to the court and their sols

Unless you are near the court to drop it in

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

When you have a revised version post it up here before sending it off.

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

I got the info back from DVLA today, shows that VCS accessed my details in December and not Excel. Could have sworn blind it was a letter from Excel

 

Do i print and post a copy of WS to the court, VCS have no solicitor acting for them

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think you're wrong.  Why else would you have thought up the word "Excel"?  Plus the PCN was missing when the solicitors replied to your CPR request.  Excel have not replied to your SAR.

 

Send Simple Simon's copy by 2nd class post (get a free Certificate of Posting).  You can e-mail the court theirs (again, get a receipt).

 

But please post your WS up here before sending.

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

yours to both

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

Excellent stuff

 

might be worth adding after

"attend a contracted job" in my professional capacity as a ***** It sets the stall out as definitely a work scenario as well, as it would also be right and proper if a taxi driver, parked in that allocated space

in order to pick up the disabled occupant of that property, or a delivery driver delivering to that one as well.

 

Again I woul let the others have a look and see if anything else pops outas helpful.

  • Like 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

That looks really good.

 

The paragraphs need to be numbered, but as it was me who knackered the numbering I suppose I should sort it out!  I promise to do so late this evening.  That gives the chance to others to pop in and comment. 

 

What's the deadline for sending it off?

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 put the numbers back in and seen to some typos.  I've also made some changes which you may or not agree with, so -

 

3.  I've added BN's suggestion.

 

12.  I've cut out "I have now been supplied with PCN from VCS".  Don't do VCS's work for them.  Exhibit 2 should be the stuff you got from the solicitor which did not include the PCN.

 

29 & 31.  Yesterday EL21 wrote a wonderful WS and I've added a couple of their ideas here to beef up the points.

 

41.  I've added a 41 since new info. about VCS has come up in recent weeks.

 

You need to sort out the exhibit numbers.

 

I see your hearing is at the end of November, so need to send off just yet, others may have comments.

WITNESS STATEMENT Emma Oct 21 Redacted(1).pdf

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

Hideyspidey

I am so sorry to have confused you in my post 180. It was intended for another poster!

 

Clearway signs are not relevant in your case and so you should delete it from your WS.

 

However you can argue that the Privacy notice on your windscreen was a non compliant Notice to Driver so the Notice to keeper should not have arrived before 28 days had elapsed. Therefore they cannot transfer the paying of the alleged debt to the keeper as the NTK was non compliant.

 

If the Judge does not agree with the Privacy notice being a NTD and the NTK arrived within the 14 days you can still complain that it is not compliant with PoFA for another reason which I will deal with tomorrow.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

In order for an NTK to be compliant it has to comply with PoFA. If it is not compliant then the keeper cannot be held liable for the PCN. 

 

I have included the wording from S8 though  s9 is identical in the part I have copied below. You will see that at the beginning  "The Notice  'must' " which in Law means the wording  is to be stictly observed

 

(2)The notice must—

(a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;

 

(b)inform the keeper that the driver is required to pay parking charges in respect of the specified period of parking and that the parking charges have not been paid in full;

 

(c)state that a notice to driver relating to the specified period of parking has been given and repeat the information in that notice as required by paragraph 7(2)(b), (c) and (f);

 

(d)if the unpaid parking charges specified in that notice to driver as required by paragraph 7(2)(c) have been paid in part, specify the amount that remains unpaid, as at a time which is—

(i)specified in the notice to keeper, and

 

(ii)no later than the end of the day before the day on which the notice is either sent by post or, as the case may be, handed to or left at a current address for service for the keeper (see sub-paragraph (4));

 

(e)state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper—

 

(i)to pay the unpaid parking charges; or

 

(ii)if the keeper was not the driver of the vehicle, to notify the creditor of the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and to pass the notice on to the driver;

 

(f)warn the keeper that if, at the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to keeper is given—

 

(i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges (as specified under paragraph (c) or (d)) has not been paid in full, and

 

(ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver,

 

the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid;

 

(g)inform the keeper of any discount offered for prompt payment and the arrangements for the resolution of disputes or complaints that are available;

 

(h)identify the creditor and specify how and to whom payment or notification to the creditor may be made;

 

(i)specify the date on which the notice is sent (if it is sent by post) or given (in any other case).

 

If you compare that with the NTK you were sent you will see that your one does not include  "   (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) "

 

Your NTK also states that if you don't pay the £100 that you will be liable for debt collection charges up to £60. this contradicts section 4 of PoFA where it covers the right of the parking crooks to pursue motorists

 

[5] (5)The maximum sum which may be recovered from the keeper by virtue of the right conferred by this paragraph is the amount specified in the notice to keeper under paragraph 8(2)(c) or (d) or, as the case may be, 9(2)(d) (less any payments towards the unpaid parking charges which are received after the time so specified).

 

So their NTK is non compliant in two places. 

 

In any event Ambreen is wrong to declare that if they cannot pursue the keeper than they can assume that the keeper was the driver. The court will not entertain that idea -VCS need to provide strict proof that the keeper is the driver.

 

So despite Ambreen claiming that they can proceed against the keeper she is wrong. [17,18 and !9 of her WS].

 

They quote Parking Eye v Beavis   [22] which is irrelevant since that was a free car park and yours is a residential parking space covered by a lease which VCS cannot overturn.

 

 

Edited by dx100uk
added A few blank lines only..dx
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...