PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

VCS COUNTY COURT CLAIM FOR STOPPING AT HUMBERSIDE AIRPORT
Babyshark
post Fri, 31 Aug 2018 - 15:32
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 31 Aug 2018
Member No.: 99,657



Hello
I’m hoping that I am posting this in the correct place the correct way (trying to do along this on my phone) I’m unlucky enough to have received County Court Claim form today for what seems to be an 11 second stopping spell in the renowned bus stop lay-by trap at Humberside Airport. I’ve thrown all I have at VCS since November last year, failed the appeal, received god knows how many debt collection letters, responded to their letter before claim and now this. So I believe I now need to acknowledge this claim and send my defence. So what I’m really looking for is some help on the defence, as I suppose this is now my last chance to shake VCS off. I’ve not drafted anything yet but will get onto it ASAP. I’m thinking of following along the lines of my response to the letter before claim which I have copied below. Any help/pointers/advice will be gratefully received.







I am in receipt of your letter before claim dated 22nd July 2018. I was surprised to receive this correspondence as since your last correspondence I have received no less than 5 letters from your debt collection agencies Zenith and DRP for this alleged 11 seconds worth of “parking charge” which allegedly took place on 7th November 2017.

After what can only be described as 10 months worth of relentless threats and harassment from yourselves and your partner “debt collectors” with their threatening correspondence even in the absence of a County Court Judgement against me. I am once again having to spend quite some time away from my infant son to defend myself from what can only be classed as extortion. It has only this past year, been suggested by our very own members of Parliament that parking outfits such as yourselves be further regulated as poor signage, unreasonable terms, exorbitant fines, aggressive demands for payment and opaque appeals processes indeed have no place in 21st century Britain and quite frankly you have no place persistently interfering with my day to day life. To date you have served to be nothing short of a noose around my neck during a time when I should be focusing on life as a new mother and I should be directing all of my attention toward my infant son. You may, or may not be interested to know that I am not of the type of person that goes out of their way to take my chances in relation to the rules of the road and their respective laws. You certainly seem to be quite insistent that I am indebted to you because you seem to believe you have some sort of level of authority.

I am copying into this response to you, Humberside Airport also, as I am sure it will be in their commercial interests to see why perhaps members of the public aren’t utilising their services. Since the beginning of your harassment campaign for an alleged 11 second long carparking charge, it appears that you have inflicted your “carparking charge” reign of terror on many many people around me also. I for one, certainly won’t be paying Humberside Airport a visit any time soon to utilise any of their services for fear of being held liable by yourselves for undertaking some sort of innocent action which you may disguise as a “parking charge”.

I do not accept liability of the said debt or “parking charge”. No doubt you are still in possession of all the correspondence in relation to this matter to date dated 21st November 2017 and 28th November 2017. To summarise my reasons for not accepting liability:-

Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 does not apply as Humberside Airport is subject to Humberside International Airport Bylaws 1999 which are clearly stated on their website and enshrined in law. As a result you are not legally entitled to pursue me for any sort of “parking charge” under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.
A parking charge for a period of parking cannot cannot apply to the stopping a vehicle. Your notice to keeper states “stopping” as the reason for your “parking charge”. A “parking charge” can also not apply to any area of land which is not a car park. Your charge notices appear to be nothing more than an attempt to impose a fixed penalty in which you have no authority in law to do so. The photographs you have provided on your two charge notices show a vehicle that cannot even be identified as the one I am registered keeper of with it’s brake lights and rear number plate lights clearly illuminated. A parked car does not have illuminated lights.
The amount charged does not represent a genuine estimate of loss. Nothing has been provided to me to date to state yours or any land owner or Humberside airports particular losses arising out of this specific alleged incident. It is unreasonable for you to pursue “parking charges” for the stopping of vehicle for a mere 11 seconds given that 15 minutes free parking is indeed available a matter of meters away from where you claim the said incident occurred. You have repeatedly stated that you consider your charges not extravagant or unconscionable as supported by the Supreme Courts decision in the case of ParkingEye v Beavis. However I fail to see any similarity between the individual circumstances here and this case that you repeatedly refer to.
There is no contract with the registered keeper as per ‘The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation & Additional Payments) Regulations 2013
To date you have not provided me with evidence that you are legally entitled or contracted by the registered owner of the land to pursue charges/penalties/raise invoices for alleged incidents. Indeed such time has now passed in that a Landowner can no longer make a claim.
You are trying to enforce an unfair contract as per ‘Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999’ & OFT ‘Unfair Contract Terms

I would also point out that you have claimed within your two charge notices to have obtained my details from the DVLA Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002. However, as the registered keeper of the vehicle, you are not entitled to pursue me under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, as this Act does not apply to the land on which the alleged offence took place. You have unlawfully obtained and then misused my personal information and this is a breach of DVLA Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002. You have utilised information from the DVLA to undertake your campaign of harassment and extortion for your own financial gain. I reserve the right to pursue a complaint in this regard to DVLA.

Should you continue to insist that you will commence legal proceedings against myself, I shall of course ask the Judge to consider all of the above and all that stated on my previous correspondence to you to date.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
3 Pages V   1 2 3 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Fri, 31 Aug 2018 - 15:32
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Fri, 31 Aug 2018 - 16:46
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,616
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Yes you acknowledge
Do it online today
Leave the defence entirely blank.

Your response isn't bad but we have a few on here which are better as defences

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Babyshark
post Fri, 31 Aug 2018 - 17:14
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 31 Aug 2018
Member No.: 99,657



Thanks Nosferatu1001. I leave the defence blank to enable VCS to submit their statement first I guess?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Fri, 31 Aug 2018 - 17:27
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,616
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Don't guess!

No, you acknowledge to give you time to submit your defence LATER. You have 33 days from issue date to serve your defence. You don't get reminded about this.

You reallly really really need to not guess about this stiff, and find it out. Easiest is to google MSE forum newbies thread. Post 2 gives you a step by step of court claims.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cabbyman
post Fri, 31 Aug 2018 - 17:43
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5,805
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town.
Member No.: 16,066



To save you from anymore of Nosferatu's wrath:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showth...d.php?t=4816822

wink.gif tongue.gif


--------------------
Cabbyman 10 PPCs 0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Babyshark
post Fri, 31 Aug 2018 - 18:21
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 31 Aug 2018
Member No.: 99,657



Thank you. I’ve spent days over the past few months sifting through hundreds of posts trying to gather relevant info and try to make sense of the whole thing, it gets very confusing. Having read the protocol I responded to the letter of claim on 20th August (by email). It states in the protocol of that VCS should give me 14 days notice of intention to commence proceedings. They’ve not sent me anything since I responded to their letter of claim. So they are not compliant in the protocol.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SchoolRunMum
post Fri, 31 Aug 2018 - 18:30
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,683
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Member No.: 32,130



You appear to be talking about a Letter of Claim (i.e. the last letter BEFORE a court claim commences).

Yet you are not at that stage. You are at actual claim stage (not 'Letter of Claim').

QUOTE
I responded to the letter of claim on 20th August (by email).


Errrm what do you mean, have you NOT done the AOS to the CCBC, on MCOL? The NEWBIES thread post #2 from MSE, as already linked for you, shows you in pictures, how to do that properly and it does not involve sending an email to VCS.

I am worried you have NOT done the AOS for this claim yet, eeek, get reading the MSE thread second post as already linked!

It also has an example VCS airport defence linked in the same post, because once you have done the AOS, you MUST file a defence and no, you do not get some sort of response back first, asking for the defence.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Babyshark
post Sat, 1 Sep 2018 - 19:08
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 31 Aug 2018
Member No.: 99,657



SchoolRunMum apologies I haven’t been clear. Ignore my last post, I was thinking at the time of the post that VCS had not followed the preaction protocol, but having re-read the preaction protocol, they have.

I received a letter before claim 22nd July. I am now in receipt of County Court Claim Form received 31st August. So the issue now is the County Court Claim. My baby was in hospital yesterday due to illness. I am getting onto the acknowledgement of service tonight and will begin drafting my defence tonight too.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Babyshark
post Sat, 1 Sep 2018 - 21:00
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 31 Aug 2018
Member No.: 99,657



AOS done as per the helpful instructions in the Newbies thread.

I can not locate the example VCS airport defence in the MSE Newbies thread. Have I missed it? I have found another substantial defence recently posted by coupon-mad.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showth...51307#topofpage

Would you recommend to follow along the lines of this defence? It is recent although relates to Robin Hood not Humberside.

Many thanks
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SchoolRunMum
post Sat, 1 Sep 2018 - 22:49
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,683
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Member No.: 32,130



Yes that's the one I was thinking of (I am Coupon-mad on MSE)!

It is long and others might want to suggest edits to remove any waffle...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cuthbert
post Sun, 2 Sep 2018 - 08:52
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 197
Joined: 27 Dec 2014
Member No.: 74,894



Bargepole suggest this for Liverpool, ask him to help, I have put a brief defense up, if court claim issued, contest jurisdiction (they only have six months to take to magistrates court)

1. The material location to which this claim relates, is Humberside Airport.

2. Byelaws have been in place since 1999.

3. Any breach of the parking restrictions, as alleged by the Claimant in this action, is, therefore, a breach of the bylaws, and must be treated as a criminal offence, which cannot be the subject of a civil claim.

4. The correct jurisdiction for this matter is, therefore, the Magistrates' Court, and not the County Court.

https://www.humbersideairport.com/media/732...yelaws_1999.pdf link to byelaws.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Spudandros
post Sun, 2 Sep 2018 - 14:42
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 168
Joined: 7 Feb 2016
Member No.: 82,244



QUOTE (Cuthbert @ Sun, 2 Sep 2018 - 09:52) *
Bargepole suggest this for Liverpool, ask him to help, I have put a brief defense up, if court claim issued, contest jurisdiction


I thought you had to pay to contest jurisdiction and it wasn't just a case of ticking the box on MCOL, no?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cuthbert
post Sun, 2 Sep 2018 - 15:37
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 197
Joined: 27 Dec 2014
Member No.: 74,894



Cannot see any mention of charges, its just tick the box.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Sun, 2 Sep 2018 - 16:30
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,146
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



Why are you contesting jurisdiction? The court is in England, you are in England. It is a civil claim
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Spudandros
post Sun, 2 Sep 2018 - 23:23
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 168
Joined: 7 Feb 2016
Member No.: 82,244



QUOTE (ostell @ Sun, 2 Sep 2018 - 17:30) *
Why are you contesting jurisdiction? The court is in England, you are in England. It is a civil claim


I think the suggestion is contesting that civil courts have jurisdiction to deal with matters that are bylaw breaches and should be dealt with in magistrates court. But I doubt it would work here as, unlike Indigo at railway stations, VCS are not pursuing under bylaws and argue that there is nothing in bylaws that prohibit a complementary civil parking management scheme to be put in place.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cuthbert
post Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 07:56
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 197
Joined: 27 Dec 2014
Member No.: 74,894



From their byelaws,
“the Road Traffic enactments” mean the enactments relating to road traffic including
the lighting and parking of vehicles and any Order or other instrument having effect
by virtue of any such enactment;
This means it is not a civil matter.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 07:57
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,616
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



QUOTE (Cuthbert @ Sun, 2 Sep 2018 - 16:37) *
Cannot see any mention of charges, its just tick the box.

Youve misssed that after completing that box, you have to file an application within 14 days, and all applicaitons attract a fee.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 08:28
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,146
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



But they are claiming for non payment of their invoice and not for a breach of the byelaws. I would suggest that any byelaws "offence" died after 6 months.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 08:38
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,616
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



It doesnt alter that this is "not relevant land" for the purpose of POFA, so they will have to fall back on using the (UN-) "reasonable assumption" of the driver being the keeper a swell.

Any defence will need to attack that the Keepr has NO liability in this
- they cannot use POFA
- no asusmpotions can be drawn about the drivers identity. EVEN BETETR if hte keeper can say they were not the driver, just do not lie!
- If it can be shown there are X regular users of the vehicle (on insurance, have access to it and use their iunsurance on DOV basis, etc) then this further tips the balance away from the keeper being the driver

This is of course just ONE argument.

- You then chlalenge them to prove they have standing to puruse parking charges in their own name
- you then have forbidding "contracts" thatt cannot be read at speed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cuthbert
post Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 10:36
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 197
Joined: 27 Dec 2014
Member No.: 74,894



VCS can claim what they want, the byelaws covers parking etc, a civil claim cannot be taken out as this was an offence under byelaws and the land owner should have taken action in the magistrates court, this is why you quote byelaws and no jurisdiction.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Friday, 21st September 2018 - 16:46
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.