VCS SpyCar PCN Claimform - Bristol Airport PCN No. 1

[FTMDave]

At DQ stage you will get to choose the court.  Don't worry.

 

Did you use MCOL to file the AOS?

 

You need to get a CPR request off to Elms  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/409718-cpr-3114-request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-ppc-private-land-parking-court-claim/

 

If you scoll down to  Q2) How should I defend?  at  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/393251-received-a-court-claim-from-a-private-parking-speculative-invoice-how-to-deal-with-it-hereupdated-dec-2021/  you will see the generic defence we normally use.  You still have plenty of time to file it though.

 

[FTMDave]

Great work.  Well done.

 

In his WS Simon will say the signs are reflective and the best in the industry.  It will help you to show (a) you couldn't see the damn things and (b) that Simon is telling porkies about the signs so the rest of the WS cannot be taken seriously.

 

On 01/08/2022 at 16:47, southwestram said:

However, the folder on the Zip File relating to this charge is empty. All of the information provided refers only to the other PCN issued.

 

Two things.

 

VCS have a statutory duty to comply with SARs.  If they don't, you can sue them!

 

I suppose a good strategy would be to tell them you don't believe they have complied with the SAR without going into detail, then if they again don't comply Letter of Claim and then court.

 

Have  a serious think about whether you want to go down this road though.  About the worst thing you can do in a legal dispute is threaten action which you then don't take, from then on you're just seen as a paper tiger.  Only make the threat if you really are prepared to sue them.

 

Secondly, all this talk of ZIP files makes me think you're communicating by e-mail with Simon.  If you do this, at Witness Statement stage VCS will file a pack of lies at one minute to the court deadline giving you no opportunity to respond.  We've seen these shenanigans before.

 

[FTMDave]

The fist case we have for VCS at that airport was in December 2019.

 

The contract they produce in their WSs is from October 2019.

[FTMDave]

I think you're mixing two things up.

 

Prior to October 2019 VCS had no involvement at the airport.  Then in that month they signed a contract with the airport to "manage" the no-stopping area which still continues now.

 

They should have then approached the local council for planning permission to erect their signs, an easy permission to obtain, but as that would have delayed their fleecing, and they have complete contempt for the law, they never did so.  Not obtaining planning permission is a crime, so you can use this against them.  That's why you asked to see proof of planning permission in your CPR request - you know full well they don't have PP so they can't respond.

[FTMDave]

18 hours ago, southwestram said:

I would like to state my defence without necessarily giving all the details of how I plan to defend the case - which woulld only give them time to come up with some obscure case reference from 90 years ago, or make some spurious excuse for them pursuing me.

Nail.  Hit.  On.  Head.

 

Go to  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/393251-received-a-court-claim-from-a-private-parking-speculative-invoice-how-to-deal-with-it-hereupdated-dec-2021/

 

Scroll down to  Q2) How should I defend?

 

There you will find your bland, generic defence.

 

You're doing amazing research, well done, but the evidence you're gathering will go in your Witness Statement, to be filed at the court much later on, a fortnight before the court case.

[FTMDave]

Yes, do it on MCOL.

[FTMDave]

I'm at East Midlands Airport at the moment.  I travelled here by coach.  Of course this is a different airport from you but Simple Simon has been let loose here too.

 

It struck me that, although there are numerous signs, the majority do not face the oncoming driver.  Most are parallel to the road.  There's no point in there being masses of signs if the driver doesn't see them.

 

They also all state "Private Property" and I'm not at all convinced this is true.

 

Also in among VCS's signs there are normal road signs saying stopping is not allowed, which of course underlines that the RTA and bye-laws apply.

 

If I had less luggage or someone else with me I would go looking for the VCS spy-car to take photos of it just to annoy VCS's bod, out of sheer bloody mindedness, but no can do!

[FTMDave]

But how do you know the hearing is 23 March?

 

Because you will have got a letter form the court with the hearing date, plus the info dx is requesting.

[FTMDave]

Phone you local court tomorrow and ask for a PDF copy to be sent by e-mail.

 

If by some freak they won't play ball, ask at least to be told the deadline for exchanging Witness Statements.

 

It's generally 14 days before the hearing, but the odd judge does ask for the WSs yonks before.

Edited February 16, 2023 by FTMDave
Typo

[FTMDave]

Regarding your other points.  Well you hit the nail on the head with -

 

4 hours ago, southwestram said:

Altogether, it's a pretty convincing case. Until it is examined in real life.

Your job is to produce a WS including all the excellent points you've made about their rubbish signage (and a lot more besides).

[FTMDave]

Not necessarily.  Some judges do this.

 

Have you received a WS from VCS?

[FTMDave]

Sounds legit then.  But if VCS are late you can be late too. 

 

Especially as they are the claimant.  And an, ahem, professional company.

 

Whereas you are the defendant.  And a Litigant-in-Person.

 

Just to be sure, can you upload the court document please?

[FTMDave]

18 minutes ago, FTMDave said:

Have you received a WS from VCS?

 

[FTMDave]

Apologies, dx, I thought the OP was referring to a court order dated 2 January,.

 

All as clear as mud.

 

This is bad, ignoring a county court order and not even telling us VCS had sent a WS.

[FTMDave]

8 hours ago, southwestram said:

I imagine that I'll need to come up with a WS very quickly, to be posted to the court and VCS without delay.

Yes, ideally by 4pm when the court closes today, but presumably that will be impossible.

 

The next deadline would be by 4pm on Monday.  I don't mind tweaking any WS you come up with late this evening when i knock off work, and on Sunday, and you could e-mail to to the court and the fleecers late on Sunday.

 

8 hours ago, southwestram said:

I aim to keep it to concentrating on their inadequate, illegible and often absent signage that leads to confusion. I mean, telling drivers that there is no stopping past the sign is ridiculous. It doesn't say where it applies, so one could only assume that it refers to areas with visible signage prohibiting stopping.

Well yes and no.

 

Certainly include all the excellent research you've done on the rubbish signs.

 

But don't stop there.  VCS have lost no-stopping airport cases many times due to the deficient contracts with the landowners that they have produced.

 

Have a look at the attachment in post 110 here  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/421775-vcs-spycar-pcn-paploc-now-claimform-no-stopping-east-midlands-airport/page/5/#comments

 

If it's not in post 110 it'll be a couple of posts above or below, sometimes the post count goes wonky.

 

This is a superb WS, the content and layout of which can be your base.  The case is very similar to yours.  Look at how Alaska101 sets out the introduction and the conclusion.  And how the clear headings show the judge instantly which legal arguments are being used.  

 

Also look at the WS in post 87 here  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/441301-vcs-spycar-pcn-paploc-now-claimform-no-stopping-bristol-airport-claim-dismissed/page/4/#comments  This is for a case at the same airport.  You can use loads of research that other Caggers have done.

[FTMDave]

I've just read this thread from the start, and you've done superb research.

 

Get it all in a WS this evening if you can.  Then all the regulars can comment and it can be tweaked.

 

It'll arrive at the court 17 days late on Monday, but well before the hearing, it's to be hoped the judge is in a lenient mood. 

 

I'm not sure how you show videos to the court, and have flagged the matter up for more experienced Site Team members to answer.

[FTMDave]

I've just had a quick skim through things due to work, but what you've prepared looks superb.  Plan for after work - food, beer from the fridge and read through everything.  More later.

 

Regarding the video "Just disclose it disclose it along with documents/photographs/statements. Once referred to within a statement it becomes a disclosure although it's important to check with the court in advance how it will be shown? (Users own device or court projection)

 

CPR 31.12 may be appropriate in disclosing recorded evidence".

Edited February 17, 2023 by FTMDave
Typo

[FTMDave]

All the research you've put in over the months has been superb.

The WS is 99.99% excellent.

However, if it can be improved by 0.01%, why not?

Obviously the paragraphs need to be numbered in much more detail than they are ATM.

Above your current (4) I would write the title SEQUENCE OF EVENTS.

This is the place to - briefly - describe what happened which led to you getting the ticket.  Yes, I know you've included it in (10), but it needs to go in here briefly too.  In fact, especially here.

Your other ticket is not directly relevant here but I would quickly include it anyway as part of showing VCS up to be the sharks that they are, as you've done several times further on.  Mention that a few seconds after the events contested in this case, that you had to brake sharply as a pedestrian had stepped in front of your vehicle and had you not done so you would probably have murdered the person or at the very least caused life-changing injuries.  VCS are suing you in a separate case no.XXXXX essentially for failing to kill a pedestrian.  You could also say that the two cases could easily have been combined but you suspect that VCS have issued two separate claims in order to claim more legal costs and more interest.

In (5.3) I would rub it in and change "plus PoFA is only relevant for parking" to "plus PoFA is only relevant for parking, not driving along an open road".

 

In this part stick in all of LFI's excellent stuff about the rubbish PCN.

 

In (7) also include proof of postage for your CPR request and thus challenge Ambreen's (29).  Also include that at the time of the request the claim had not been allocated to the small claims track.

In (7.2), again rub it in saying VCS are a member of a different trade association, the IPC.

Obviously include LFI's demolition of the contract.

In your ILLEGAL SIGNAGE section, (8), I don't understand why you write in the third person "he writes in his WS".

In any case, the signage section needs to be split into two.  The lack of PP and the fact the signs are rubbish are two separate matters.  Immediately after (8) stick in a new heading INSUFFICIENT SIGNAGE.

 

Right at the end of the section, just before ABUSE OF PROCESS, stick in a bit to show VCS are liars.

 

"It is neither here nor there (the Claimant's Witness Statement para 21) what the IPC considers reasonable or lawful regarding signage or anything else for that matter. What is important is what the law in England & Wales considers as reasonable and lawful.

 

In para 20 of her Witness Statement Ms Arshad has reiterated the above false claims about the signage being reflective and positioned to face oncoming motorists.  Either she has deliberately misled the court, or, perhaps more likely, she has copied and pasted from other Witness Statements and included highly-inaccurate information.  One wonders what else in her Witness Statement is inaccurate.

 

Ms Arshad is being somewhat disingenuous when she says she "may" be unable to attend the hearing.  I have researched scores of VCS court cases and I cannot find even one where Ms Arshad has ever appeared in court.  The same goes for Mr Mohammed Wali, the other paralegal employed by VCS to write witness statements.  This is particularly remarkable as hearings were by telephone or on-line during the COVID pandemic, with no travelling involved.  It seems that under no circumstances are VCS willing to have their witness statement authors questioned in court".

 

(9.3) has to go completely.  The government are being legally challenged by the fleecers on this point.

 

Personally I would trim the paragraphs preceding (9.3).  There is a lot of waffle.

 

That's it!

Edited February 17, 2023 by FTMDave
Typo

[FTMDave]

98% of what you've prepared is superb.

 

I see you've chosen not to take on board the points I made in my previous post.  I think due to this certain sections could be confusing for a judge and to leave in points that the fleecers could easily demolish isn't a good idea.  But it's your case.

 

LFI will have been writing about Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedom Act 2012.  It's incorrect to talk about a breach.  Instead of BREACH OF THE _________________ an appropriate title would be NO KEEPER LIABILITY (1) and instead of RELEVANT LAND it should be NO KEEPER LIABILITY (2).

 

[FTMDave]

Well spotted!  Yes, make it NO HIRER LIABILITY (1) and NO HIRER LIABILITY (2).

 

If you can, get another version up this evening, because there are a couple fo points to move around, but IMO you're nearly there.

[FTMDave]

I'll have a good look through everything shortly, but in the meantime, remember that all the paragraphs need to be numbered.

 

I was going to whittle on about the subject field of an e-mail to the court but see you're going to hand deliver!

[FTMDave]

What you've prepared is really, really good.  Just a couple of tweaks.

 

Just to make it crystal clear for the judge, change -

 

My phone was out of its cradle, and I could not answer
the call hands-free otherwise. I pulled over when it was safe to do so and replaced the phone, and
answered the call, then pulled off again.

 

to

 

My phone was out of its cradle, and I could not answer
the call hands-free otherwise. I pulled over when it was safe to do so and replaced the phone, and
answered the call, then pulled off again..  This is the "offence" that I am being sued for in this case.

 

There is a mistake at the start of the ILLEGAL SIGNAGE section.  PAPLOC means pre-action protocol and has nothing to do with what you're arguing.  So change the first lines -

 

ILLEGAL SIGNAGE

In the case of XXXXXXXXXX (Insert PAPLOC reference) he states in his WS:

“8. After receiving the claim form I subsequently submitted my CPR 31.14 request (Exhibit D) in
which I requested copies of the claimant’s Planning Permission for the signage at the site in
question. The claimant failed to produce any, and after checking this myself with the relevant local
authority I found out that No planning permission had been sought or granted for said signs,
therefore making them illegal as lack of planning permission is a criminal offence under the Road
Traffic Acts 1962 and 1991 and no contract can be performed where criminality is concerned.”

 

With reference to my appeal against the issuance of a Parking Charge Notice, VCS stated the
following:

 

to

 

ILLEGAL SIGNAGE

 

After receiving the claim form I subsequently submitted my CPR 31.14 request (Exhibit D) in
which I requested copies of the claimant’s planning permission for the signage at the site in
question. The claimant failed to produce any, and after checking this myself with the relevant local
authority I found out that no planning permission had been sought or granted for said signs,
therefore making them illegal as lack of planning permission is a criminal offence under the Road
Traffic Acts 1962 and 1991 and no contract can be performed where criminality is concerned.

 

INSUFFICIENT SIGNAGE

 

With reference to my appeal against the issuance of a Parking Charge Notice, VCS stated the
following:

 

This part -

 

Section 9 of the new Code of Practice, regulates the matter of recovery costs: ͞ The Parking operator
must not levy additional costs over and above the level of a parking charge or parking tariff as
originally issued

 

has to go completely as it is the part of the CoP that the fleecers are legally challenging.

 

The rest is great.

 

If you can, delay the printing and e-mailing till tomorrow morning as there are quite a few Night Owls on CAG who might have last-minute contacts. 

 

The court will close at 4pm tomorrow.  While you're there, you might as well ask about how to show your video.

[FTMDave]

We've had several Bristol airport cases since Alaska101 and there's never been any planning permission.  You did ask for PP with the CPR request and they didn't send it. 

[FTMDave]

Like the way you've resolved the ILLEGAL SIGNAGE issue.

 

Looks good to go to me.

[FTMDave]

1 hour ago, brassnecked said:

Without going through the thread, are they just claiming for the first PCN?  If so they might be stupid enough to try to claim for second even if this claim kicked out.

They have a separate court claim for the second invoice BN.