VCS Spycar PCN Claimform - no stopping JLA Liverpool Airport

[FTMDave]

Usual rubbish contract that ran out on 7 July 2015.

Edited February 9, 2022 by FTMDave
Typo

[Doomtrooper]

Hello everyone,

 

I am about to submit my defence next week. In regards to lately introduced polices by government - Parking (Code of Practice) Act 2019

which explicitly mentions "NO stoppping zone" exemptions 

Is it good idea to introduce some points in my defence in regards to new polices?

 

Thanks

[brassnecked]

 concentrate on the points indicated by the team first, post up anything you write, so it can be tweaked and as good as possible before submitting it. then see where they fit in

[FTMDave]

You've already filed your defence.  Now it's Witness Statement time.

 

Alaska101 too had to face a VCS airport no stopping claim.  Look at the attachment at post 110 here (sometimes the post numbers go a bit wonky, if it's not post 110 it'll be a couple of posts above or below 110) where there is a cracking WS you can use as the basis of yours

 

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/421775-vcs-spycar-pcn-paploc-now-claimform-no-stopping-east-midlands-airport/page/5/#comments

[lookinforinfo]

No don't do that. Just send them a very snotty letter.  eg-

You guys are always good for a laugh.  Dodgy Witness Statements and taking motorists to Court with cases that are tantamount to obtaining money by deception and now a new Government CoP coming out. Your days are numbered. 

Tick tock. Tick tock. And no one will regret your passing. Well perhaps Elms but only because they don't seem to realise how you  damage what little credibility they had.

Looking forward to seeing you in Court and getting another laugh there when you lose yet again. And  as you have breached my GDPR  into the bargain................................

 

That way you don't give away your defence and you show that you could be a problem to them in Court.

[FTMDave]

The OP has already got a claimform LFI, it's way past the snotty letter stage.

[Doomtrooper]

26 minutes ago, FTMDave said:

You've already filed your defence.  Now it's Witness Statement time.

 

Alaska101 too had to face a VCS airport no stopping claim.  Look at the attachment at post 110 here (sometimes the post numbers go a bit wonky, if it's not post 110 it'll be a couple of posts above or below 110) where there is a cracking WS you can use as the basis of yours

 

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/421775-vcs-spycar-pcn-paploc-now-claimform-no-stopping-east-midlands-airport/page/5/#comments

 

IS there any information what is the outcome of this case? Was it lost or won?

[FTMDave]

We don't know.  I've just asked Alaska101 again if they can report back.

 

Since that time though several Caggers have used Alaska101's WS as a basis for theirs - and won.

[Doomtrooper]

Good evening everyone.

I am almost ready to submit my defence. I also want to add another point in regards cost of attendance at Court ( lost of earnings)

 

In the matter of costs, the Defendant seeks:

7. (a) standard witness costs for attendance at Court, to CPR 27.14, and (b) that any hearing is not vacated but continues as a costs hearing, in the event of a late Notice of Discontinuance.  The Defendant seeks a finding of unreasonable behaviour in the pre-and post-action phases by this Claimant, and will seek further costs pursuant to CPR 46.5.

[dx100uk]

you put in a costs sheet at the WS stage - as it says WITNESS cost for attending - you might not be attending in person anyway..as it could be a telephone/video hearing ...so no costs as such!

 

not add confusion and try and be clever at the defence stage.

dont go there!

 

std defence only as advised

not due till / by 4pm 22nd!!

[FTMDave]

Apologies, ignore the nonsense I posted above.

 

Of course you're at the defence stage (your Witness Statement will come much later).

[Doomtrooper]

No worries FTMDave

 

Sorry for rising another concern, but during the weekend I have tried to spend maximum time to do research. I just also found that PPCs often introduce debt recovery. Now I know I should be concise  and simple with my defence, keeping my cards coverd, but I have heard that I wont be able to introduce another points of defence in my WS.  What you think about introducing last point 

 

6. The Claimant alleged recovery costs include an additional £60 for “debt collection charge”. Aforementioned sum represents an attempt at double recovery, which may be considered an abuse of process, and invite the Court to strike out the claim ab initio for that reason.

 

or extending exisiting 5 para by aforementioned '' Abuse of Process '' line of defence

 

5.  The Claimant's invoice was issued in early April 2018 and it is unreasonable for the Claimant to delay litigation for nearly four years and to claim 8% interest for that whole period.

[dx100uk]

not sure about 6

but IMHO 5 YES

 

 

[Doomtrooper]

I have just noticed 5 para in my defence

 

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.

 

Can  I expand this line of defence in WS by ''abuse of process'' by adding additional 60£ as Debt recovery costs? 

 

 

 

 

[FTMDave]

It doesn't really make much odds.

 

Generally we don't mention the Unicorn Food Tax in the defence but it is brought up at WS stage (look for example at the end part of Alaska101's WS).

 

It won't do your any harm to include it in your defence, if you do so make it a separate point from the interest.

[Doomtrooper]

ok thank you very much guys. I really appreciate help

[FTMDave]

Three of us posting at the same time!  So to sum up, with the odd typo sorted out, and with (5) being OK but not essential  -

 

1.  It is admitted that the Defendant is the recorded keeper of xxxxxxx.

 

2.   As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance.  The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner.  Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has the authority to bring this claim.  The proper claimant is the landowner

 

3.  It is denied that the Defendant breached any terms and conditions set on private land.

 

4.  It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant, or broke any such contract.

 

5.  The Claimant's alleged recovery costs include an additional £60 for “debt collection charge”.  The aforementioned sum represents an attempt at double recovery, which may be considered an abuse of process, and the Defendant invites the Court to strike out the claim ab initio for that reason.

 

6.  The Claimant's invoice was issued in early April 2018 and it is unreasonable for the Claimant to delay litigation for nearly four years and to claim 8% interest for that whole period.

 

7.  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.

[Doomtrooper]

Hello everyone,

Lately I came across another hint which can be used aginst VCS.

The thing which I managed to figure out is

If VCS cited in their various PCN or NTK, that driver made contravention on ''private land'' then it is a '' false misrepresentation'' ( because we know that airport roads are under bylaws). So trying to recover money on that premise is classified as a fraud (Sec 2 chpt 35 Fraud Act 2006).

 

Is it good idea to use this in my defence?

How to properly formulate that point in defence?

 

Edited February 16, 2022 by Doomtrooper

[dx100uk]

not true sadly.

 

you can only have byelaws on private land.

 

and there is not such thing as false misrepresentation!!

 

thats an oxymoron!!

 

think about it.........

 

representation is when someone represents someone else

 

misrepresentation means its not representation.

 

so false misrepresentation - means representation - a double negative!

 

i know where you've got that from and the whole of that 'article' is a load of ole BS.

sadly its doing the rounds on most of the silly parking sites here on the internet and on facebook groups.

 

if you look carefully its mainly focused from a small group of 3 people of long standing that were kicked off of another site not too long ago because they were extorting money out of people by private messaging.

just to scam people out of more and more money eventually.

 

dx

 

 

 

 

 

[lookinforinfo]

 

Byelaws - United Kingdom Law - Oxford LibGuides at Oxford University

LIBGUIDES.BODLEIAN.OX.AC.UK

---

Oxford LibGuides: United Kingdom Law: Byelaws

Byelaws are effectively local laws to deal with local issues. They are made by a body, such as a local authority, using powers granted by an Act of Parliament, and so are a  form of delegated legislation. Some byelaws are made by private companies or charities that exercise public or semi-public functions, such as airport operators, water companies or the National Trust
Byelaws generally require something to be done - or not done - in a particular location. As the non-observance of a byelaw result in a criminal offence tried in a Magistrates' Court, they must be approved by central government before they can come into force.

 

Even if your thoughts were valid we would still advise you to keep it for your WS rather than your defence. The WS is where you land your heavy punches and Bye Laws have their place within the WS.

[Doomtrooper]

Thank you guys for clarification

[lookinforinfo]

Ancala acquires 45% interest in Liverpool John Lennon Airport

WWW.LIVERPOOLAIRPORT.COM

---

Welcome to the official Liverpool John Lennon Airport website - connecting Liverpool and the North West with the world.

 

[Doomtrooper]

Good afternoon everyone

I have submitted my defence.

I  am about to fill N180

Why I should choose No to meditation?

I heard it cant go against me ,but it could go in my favour, couldnt it?

[dx100uk]

Why have the court sent you one?

 

Dx

[Doomtrooper]

Yes