VCS Spycar PCN Claimform - no stopping - JLA - Liverpool ***Claim Dismissed*** NO CONTRACT SINCE 2015!!

[FTMDave]

You don't have to do anything.

 

Simple Simon has to pay the hearing fee by 27 May (a Friday), or his case will be chucked in the bin.  Make a note in your diary to phone the court on Monday 30 to see if VCS have done this.

Edited February 17, 2022 by FTMDave
Typo

[JimmySpices]

Thank you FTMDave, that's what I thought. I've been following Flamjam's case, as it was identical to mine for the past few months until his court order required a WS, but mine doesn't. I'll call the Court on 30th May as you suggest. 

[dx100uk]

it does prepare a WS, the letter says assume its going ahead on 24/6/22 - so 14 days before exchange them.

[FTMDave]

@JimmySpices  You keep PMing me, but as I've told you "please post for help on your thread, as I'm on holiday out of the EU at the moment and only log on when I get free WiFi in my accommodation".

 

You're already three days late with your WS.  The courts allow some leeway for Litigants in Person but the WS needs to be sent to the court today.  If you post the vital information you're sending just to me, on your thread instead, then the other regulars will be able to help.

[honeybee13]

@JimmySpices, FTM is quite right, advice here is given on public threads, not by PM.

 

Please let him enjoy his break and post up what you need advice on to be able to submit your WS today or risk it not being taken into account by the judge.

 

HB

[dx100uk]

Has simon paid the fee?

[JimmySpices]

Yes fee paid. Would it be ok to use Flamjam's WS for my case as well? 

[dx100uk]

not directly no as each claim is slightly diff

but you've had 3 months to sort this and done nothing?

 

dx

 

[JimmySpices]

I've attached my finished WS. I'm not sure if I should include number 3 - personal circumstances. The rest is almost the same as as Flamjam's.

 

With regards to doing nothing for 3 months - I'm 54 never been taken to court before - the court order was vague with no specific directions, except VCS have to pay a trial fee - it even said the hearing might or might not go ahead in an undecided court and I have to phone the Court, 2 days before the hearing. I even asked a solicitor friend, who said "I don't know what the directions are." 

 

If you could bear this in mind, then great and I appreciate any help.

WS VCS JimmySpices.pdf

[FTMDave]

@JimmySpiceshave you sent the WS yet?

 

If not, I have some free time now this afternoon and could help out.  The courts close at 4pm so sending it any time till then is OK.

[honeybee13]

That's very kind of you, FTM. Four days late now, if the WS hasn't gone...

 

HB

[brassnecked]

It needs finishing and submitting before 4 without fail they will give some leeway but 4 days late is pushing it. FTMDave is going the extra mile here so make sure it goes in.

[JimmySpices]

Thanks you guys. I was going to email today, but haven't yet. Any support would be great.

I live 2 miles from the Court so could print and deliver by hand today before 4pm if needs be.

[FTMDave]

OK, will get on to it now.

 

Your idea about hand delivery is a good one, however you can e-mail them too.

[FTMDave]

Well, this is proving easy to "correct" given we're all standing on Flamjam's giant shoulders!

 

I realise time is of the essence, so a first action is to stick in a new paragraph 4.4 to include the point that LFI brought up in post 25 -

 

4.4  PoFA Schedule 4 s9 [2] states the Notice must -

and in s9 [2][f] it state -

 

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

 

(i the amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under paragraph (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."

 

Yet these sections are omitted from the Claimant's PCN meaning it is invalid under POFA and cannot create keeper liability.  The Claimant should be suing the driver.  They are suing the wrong person.

 

Onto Flamjam's ABUSE OF PROCESS section is a minute.  Flamjam's work was superb - but things have moved on since with the government Code of Practice so this bit needs to be updated.  More in a mo.

[JimmySpices]

Indeed Flamjam's giant shoulders - I found Flamjam's "planning permission" withdrawal for the signage VCS rely on:-

 

Liverpool | Liverpool City Council | Application | 157430

LAR.LIVERPOOL.GOV.UK

 

Isn't this the biggest silver bullet amongst many others? VCS or the Airport have erected a tonne of signposts for "no stopping" amongst many others without planning permission granted.

 

[FTMDave]

Between your current sections 7 and 8 stick in a new one -

 

GRACE PERIOD

 

8.  Under the Parking (Code of Practice) Act 2019 and subsequent publication of the government Code of Practice, there is a 15-minute grace/consideration period (exhibit XXX).  Even the private parking companies' trade associations allow a 10-minute grace period.  The vehicle was stopped for all of 40 seconds, well within these grace periods. 

 

8.1.  Stopping the car with the engine running for all of 40 seconds to genuinely ask for directions is "de minimis".

 

I've refereed to an exhibit here, make space for an exhibit with bits from the government's Code of Practice.  More later.

[FTMDave]

ABUSE OF PROCESS section.

 

Cut out paragraphs 8, 8.1, 8.2, 8.6, 8.11, 8.12, 8.13 as they are outdated and/or in the wrong order.  Instead start with -

 

8.   The Claimant seeks recovery of the original £100 parking charge plus an additional £60 described as “contractual costs and interest” or “debt collection costs”.  No further justification or breakdown has been provided as required under Civil Procedure Rule16.4.

 

8.1  The government Code of Practice section 9, published according to the Parking (Code of Practice) Act 2019, is crystal clear -

 

"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".

 

8.2  Even before this recent Act, the law was clear that the maximum sum that could be claimed was that of the PCN.  PoFA Schedule 4,paragraph 4 (5) states that “The maximum sum which may be recovered from the keeper is the amount specified in the notice to keeper” which in this case is £100.

8.2 Unless the Claimant can clearly demonstrate how these alleged additional costs have been incurred this would appear to be an attempt at double recover

 

8.3  The Claimant is indeed attempting triple recovery.  In a letter to me dated 17/02/2022, they state they will ask the court for £220 extra costs although they know full well that legal costs are capped at £50.  I look forward to hearing their advocate's argument for requesting this sum (Exhibit A).

 

Keep current paragraphs 8.3, 8.4, 8.5, 8.7, 8.8, 8.9, 8.10.

[FTMDave]

If you want a laugh - and to plant in the judge's mind that they are liars - stick in a new paragraph after current 8.10.

 

8.11  Mohammed Wali is being rather disingenuous (Claimant's Witness Statement para 40) when he says he "may" not be able to attend the hearing.  I have researched scores of VCS cases and neither he nor Ms Ambreen Arshad (the other paralegal employed by VCS to write their Witness Statements) have ever appeared in court.  This is particularly striking as during the pandemic hearings were on the telephone or on-line with no travelling involved.  In no circumstances do VCS want their Witness Statement authors to appear in a person at a hearing where they could be questioned.

 

8.12  In a number of recent cases VCS have claimed to have not received the Defendant's Witness Statement, although the Defendant had proof of posting.  I fully expect this trick to be tried in my case.

 

Sort out these bits of the government CoP into an exhibit -

 

Code of Practice

 

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.

 

Table B.1

 

Controlled land open to the general public for parking

 

Type of Land - Restricted

 

Tied to an event

 

Scale of premises - n/a

Minimum Consideration Period (mins) - 5

Grace Period (mins) - 10

Entrance - Sign to display
Specify permitted use                    
 

Sort out my destruction of the numbering in the last sections.

 

And it should be ready to go.

 

Normally we don't recommend the use of e-mail but time is of the essence.  Quote the case number and the parties in the subject heading and e-mail to the court and copy to VCS.  Request receipt of course

 

If you're a blood-minded git like me then send the WS another ten times to VCS by e-mail to take the wee wee about them pretending to have not received WSs

[JimmySpices]

Brilliant - thank you so much. Will incorporate your suggestions, email also drop off a hard copy.

I'll email VCS and call them to see if they've received it as well.

[FTMDave]

8 minutes ago, JimmySpices said:

email also drop off a hard copy.

 

8 minutes ago, JimmySpices said:

I'll email VCS and call them to see if they've received it as well.

Great idea!  Be sure to record the call.  It'd be superb if they admitted on the phone to receiving it then later tried to lie in court!

[JimmySpices]

FTMDave - with regards your post 68 above, unfortunately I had already gone through the VCS online appeals and therefore naively declared myself, which I wrote in my post 26'ish.

 

The rest of the recommendations were incorporated and managed to email both to the court and VCS (Mr.Wali) and delivered by hand a hard copy to the Court before 4pm yesterday. I received automated email responses from the Court.

 

I also resent my WS to Mr.Wali, requesting confirmation of receipt and to my surprise this morning he replied saying the WS has been received. So at least

 the not delivered WS sheningans can't happen at the hearing. 

 

Thank you again for your great support. 

[FTMDave]

1 hour ago, JimmySpices said:

FTMDave - with regards your post 68 above, unfortunately I had already gone through the VCS online appeals and therefore naively declared myself, which I wrote in my post 26'ish.

Yes, I realise this, the attempt to challenge them on POFA was because POFA is supposed to deal with private car parks, not a flipping public road under the jurisdiction of the council and the police.  As you say though it probably wouldn't have made much difference as you'd outed yourself as the driver.

 

Well done in getting the confirmation from Wali.  It'd be a laugh now if in court VCS claimed not to have received it!

[brassnecked]

As it was a public road and its provable it is, it makes POFA irrelevant surely, and also leads to a GDPR claim after VCS get tolchok'd  The ynever had any excuse to seek the  keeper details as land never under their jurisdiction.   Lets hope the judge sees the case is untenavble from get go .

[JimmySpices]

Hi All,

This morning I received a Court Order via email from the local Courts:-

 

IT IS ORDERED THAT

1. Due to a lack of judicial availability the hearing 24 June 2022 is adjourned.

 

2. Parties are to file any dates to avoid to cover the next 9 months within 14 days of the date of this order. Dated 22 June 2022

 

I'll file my dates with the Court.