VCS Spycar PCN PAPLOC now Claimform - No Stopping - Bristol Airport **CLAIM DISMISSED**

[Lazy farmer]

Sent that back, no to mediation & my local court requested.

in todays post a letter to say that ELMS are no longer representing VCS on my case & an opportunity for me to pay a reduced figure of £195 

Reading similar posts this seems to be their usual tactic.

I’ve been researching witness statements on here in preparation for the hearing and read the one prepared by Alaska, does anyone know if this was successful?

A couple of points I’m not sure on, has anyone proved that Bristol Airport roads are not relevant land/ covered by byelaws/ adopted by the local council?

From what I have read so far my defence appears to be

1. That VCS have no right to issue charge notices

2. That no contract was entered into

3. The vehicle stopped at a different postcode to the one on the CN

4. The reason for stopping (in pitch darkness) was because Bristol Airport had no signage for their Meet & Greet Car Park that I had prepaid for despite a large colour coded sign at the car park entrance listing all the other different car parks. This is still the case today.

[lapwing_larry]

Don't forget that they don't know the identity of the driver and can't rely on POFA to transfer liability from the driver to the keeper as the land is not relevant. Furthermore, POFA only applies to parking events - not stopping.

[brassnecked]

The new Code of Practice contains something that  alludes to a bief stop, to read a sign etc should not lead to a PCN

 

 7.1 to 7.3

 

9. Escalation of costs

The parking operator must not levy additional costs over and above the level of a parking charge or parking tariff as originally issued.

 

 here is a link

Private Parking Code of Practice - GOV.UK

WWW.GOV.UK

 

[FTMDave]

If you look at post 94 on Doomtrooper's thread  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/441307-vcs-spycar-pcn-claimform-no-stopping-jla-liverpool-airport/page/4/#comments  there is a cracking WS.  It's based on Alaska101's but is updated due to the government's new Code of Practice.  It's a VCS-airport-no stopping case like yours.

 

You can use probably 90% of it and also weave in your personal stuff about the rubbish signage.

 

Sadly Alaska101 has not updated their thread despite numerous requests so we don't know the result.

 

 

[Lazy farmer]

Well my court hearing date has been set for 3pm on the 25th August & I need to get my witness statement in by 4pm on 21st July.

 

This was followed a couple of days later by a letter from VCS helpfully offering a reduced settlement charge of £200 but warning should I continue to trial they would be seeking an additional £220. I’m not worried by this & am committed to have my day in court.

 

I have studied Doomtroopers  & Alaska101’s witness statements & think I can produce something with their help.

 

A few questions:

Hypothetically if the defendant  was the driver would the judge ask this & would the defendant be obliged to answer?

 

Can anyone confirm if the roads within Bristol airport are not relevant land and are covered by the RTA & subject to byelaws?

 

My current thoughts are to keep my ws on point & not make hundreds of points about whether a contract exists between VCS and the airport & whether they have planning permission for their signage.

 

Instead I am planning to put forward well developed points based on the points in my last post.

Good idea or not?

 

Edited July 2, 2022 by dx100uk
spacing

[brassnecked]

VCS usual MO, they cannot ever get that extra £220 in the Small Claims track its a willy waving frightener.

[dx100uk]

the WS in this thread right at the end is worthy of its content - simon ran away!!

 

VCS ANPR PCN PAPLOC Now Claimform - No stopping - JLA Liverpool Airport ***Claim Discontinued*** - Private Land Parking Enforcement - Consumer Action Group

[dx100uk]

1 hour ago, Lazy farmer said:

Hypothetically if the defendant  was the driver would the judge ask this & would the defendant be obliged to answer?

 

Can anyone confirm if the roads within Bristol airport are not relevant land and are covered by the RTA & subject to byelaws?

you answer as you did in your defence.

 

99% probable see above WS.

most airports are identical 'politically' foe want of a differing word.

[FTMDave]

On 02/07/2022 at 20:22, Lazy farmer said:

Hypothetically if the defendant  was the driver would the judge ask this & would the defendant be obliged to answer?

It is up to Simon to prove who the driver was, and if he's been too lazy/arrogant to use POFA properly then tough.

 

At least that's how things should work and how the vast majority of judges consider things.  We did get a useless judge in a set aside hearing recently who did ask the Cagger if they were driving.

 

On 02/07/2022 at 20:22, Lazy farmer said:

Can anyone confirm if the roads within Bristol airport are not relevant land and are covered by the RTA & subject to byelaws?

Yep.

 

On 02/07/2022 at 20:22, Lazy farmer said:

My current thoughts are to keep my ws on point & not make hundreds of points about whether a contract exists between VCS and the airport & whether they have planning permission for their signage.

Lack of PP, by the letter of the law, means their case should be chucked out, but in practice that's not the case.

 

However, we have seen a hell of a lot of cases where the judge has picked up on no valid contract being produced.  That could be one of your aces and it would be madness not to include it.

Edited July 3, 2022 by FTMDave
Typos

[lookinforinfo]

Basically throw everything  that you can throw at VCS.  Each Judge has differing opinions on what is necessary to prove or disprove any case. We do not know what each one looks for so include every thing that you can. That way you do not miss perhaps the one fault in their challenge that could win the case for you.

They are losing many of their airport cases because of the Bye Laws. In their WSs they use cases to show that BYE Laws are not to be treated too seriously. However in the new Private Parking Code of Practice  1 Scope of Practice it states

Nothing in this Code of Practice overrules the provisions and enforcement of byelaws where they apply.

IE Bye Laws rule-they are not arbitrary.

 

[Lazy farmer]

Hopefully attached is my first draft WS with names dates removed etc.

I have until 4pm on the 21st July so plenty of time to add or remove bits & tidy it up.

I will put an index as the first page

 

Its basically a lightly modified version of Doomtrooper/Maximus' recent work so thank you to them & everyone else who has helped thus far. The last section about the car park with no signage is my own words so may not be very legal speak

 

Comments good or bad please

VCS Witness statement first draft pdf.pdf

[brassnecked]

A very good first draft that highlights the points well, now when FTMDave, LFI and DX take a peek tweaks will be suggested.  One issue might be the font used is not as legible as in ease of reading as  something like Arial Or Times Roman.

[lookinforinfo]

That is a very good WS.

 

I can't think of anything to add at the moment. However I will go through your thread to see if there is something else you can add.

 

It's a pty that VCS are being late with delivering their WS to the motorist. One reason could be that these are so bad that defendants are running rings around their statements and then losing the case.as they are defending the indefensible.

 

I have just looked at the original PCN they sent you.

 

In their Important note to you they state that they can pursue you as the keeper on the assumption that you were the driver.

 

That is not an assumption that is allowed in Court so put them to strict proof that you were the driver since they obviously cannot pursue you as the keeper. 

 

[If your insurance policy has other drivers named on your policy or if you have at times lent your car for family or relatives to use you could mention.

 

as well as the fact that anyone who has an insurance policy allowing them to drive another car are at the same time legally allowed to drive your car.

 

So putting them to strict proof may prove difficult for them.

[FTMDave]

That is a cracking WS.  Well done.

 

If I'm being ultra pernickety ...

 

In (10) you refer to VCS's charge as a "fine", but it isn't, it's an invoice.

 

I think it would be more logical to place (9.1.1) and (9.1.2) in your (10) FRUSTRATION OF CONTRACT section.

 

Similarly (10.1) would be better at the end of your (5) NO KEEPER LIABILITY section.

 

As I say, pernickety ...

[brassnecked]

And refer to the Fine as Parking Charge Notice or Invoice, as a Fine is criminal and can never be dealt with in a County Court. is that better folks?

[Lazy farmer]

Thanks everyone, i will get a second draft up hopefully by the weekend with these helpful amendments made.

 

I've not had the VCS WS - am i likely to see this before I have to submit mine? If so should I post it up ?

[honeybee13]

Maybe you'll see their WS but they don't always send them on time. You should send yours anyway, or the judge will take a dim view, but you'll be leaving it to the last minute. When are you due to send it please?

 

HB

[Lazy farmer]

4pm 21st July

Sorry, its got to be received by 4pm 21st July

[honeybee13]

OK, so you have a bit of time but please allow time for final checks on your second draft. I think it's possible to email this kind of thing, hopefully people will confirm.

 

HB

[Lazy farmer]

On 07/07/2022 at 13:59, lookinforinfo said:

That is a very good WS.

 

I can't think of anything to add at the moment. However I will go through your thread to see if there is something else you can add.

 

It's a pty that VCS are being late with delivering their WS to the motorist. One reason could be that these are so bad that defendants are running rings around their statements and then losing the case.as they are defending the indefensible.

 

I have just looked at the original PCN they sent you.

 

In their Important note to you they state that they can pursue you as the keeper on the assumption that you were the driver.

 

That is not an assumption that is allowed in Court so put them to strict proof that you were the driver since they obviously cannot pursue you as the keeper. 

 

[If your insurance policy has other drivers named on your policy or if you have at times lent your car for family or relatives to use you could mention.

 

as well as the fact that anyone who has an insurance policy allowing them to drive another car are at the same time legally allowed to drive your car.

 

So putting them to strict proof may prove difficult for them.

My vehicle is on a fleet policy with 20+ drivers. Could you suggest some wording to put them on strict proof that i was the driver & not just the keeper?

[honeybee13]

So are you saying that the car is normally with you but that other people can also use it if they need to?

 

HB

[FTMDave]

So stick in a new 5.5 paragraph in your already-excellent WS to hammer this point home.

 

You should wait till the last minute before sending yours in the hope of being able to ridicule VCS's, or alternatively point out to the court that they haven't sent a WS.  On the 20th I would e-mail the court their copy and send Simon his by 1st class post.

[Lazy farmer]

Just got home from work & found the VCS WS waiting for me on the mat.

 

I will scan it to pdf without my details tomorrow at work & post it up  although it looks identical to one i've seen on here.

 

They state that their £60 debt recovery charge is in line with the IPC code of Practice which limits this to a maximum of £60.

"The claimant submits that the debt recovery charge included within the claim does not exceed £60 and therefore is in accordance with the IPC code of practice."

 

Their debt recovery charge on my Charge notices & court paperwork is £70!

[brassnecked]

Oh dear, that tenner extra that's different to their WS is not going to do them much good

[Lazy farmer]

Attached the VCS Claimant WS 

VCS Claimant WS 15.7.22.pdf