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: 26
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
4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 39)
Advertisement
post Fri, 31 Aug 2018 - 15:32
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 10:43
Post #21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,425
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



And it is why you have to file an applicaiton, it isnt jut a case of ticking a box.

Have you found that out yet?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 12:02
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,680
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



Did they tell you they were claiming under byelaws? Have you posted up the NTK they received for others to see.

In your first post you call it a Parking Charge. If it was byelaws it would be a penalty.

This post has been edited by ostell: Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 12:06
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cuthbert
post Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 12:17
Post #23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 199
Joined: 27 Dec 2014
Member No.: 74,894



VCS can claim what they like. the bye laws take precedence.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 12:48
Post #24


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,680
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



BUT ARE THEY CLAIMING UNDER BYELAWS !!!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Babyshark
post Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 13:05
Post #25


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 26
Joined: 31 Aug 2018
Member No.: 99,657



Would you like me to post the CN NTK?

On the claim form the particulars of claim are as follows:-

The claimants claim is for the sum of 160 being monies due from the Defendant in respect of a Charge Notice (CN) for a contravention on 07/11/2017 at Humberston International Airport (Kirmington). The CN relates to (my car). The terms of the CN allowed the defendant 28 days from the issue date to pay the CN, but the defendant failed to do so. Despite demand having been made the Defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability.
The Claimant seeks the recovery of the CN and interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% at the same rate up the date of Judgment or earlier payment.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ManxRed
post Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 14:58
Post #26


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,268
Joined: 20 Aug 2008
Member No.: 21,992



Although byelaws exist at that location, the parking company has chosen to pursue you under a breach of contract. There's nothing that says they MUST pursue you under byelaws.

The presence of byelaws does mean that the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 does not apply (as the land is not considered relevant land for the purposes of the Act) but they are saying the driver breached a contract they formed with the parking company, and they are pursuing on that basis, not under byelaws.


--------------------
Sometimes I use big words I don't understand in an effort to make myself sound more photosynthesis.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cuthbert
post Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 15:17
Post #27


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 199
Joined: 27 Dec 2014
Member No.: 74,894



You cannot have both, forget POPLA, this land is covered by bye laws for parking, forget what VCS says, the land cannot be covered by both and as the bye laws are in place this is how it should have been dealt with. Bargepole who is one of the most knowledgeable people on parking laws and has been a lay rep on numerous occasions stated this is the defense for Liverpool Airport which is also covered by bye laws.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ManxRed
post Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 15:29
Post #28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,268
Joined: 20 Aug 2008
Member No.: 21,992



They're not doing both, they're doing contract.

The current Defence at LJLA is, as I understand it, based on contract.


--------------------
Sometimes I use big words I don't understand in an effort to make myself sound more photosynthesis.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kommando
post Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 15:39
Post #29


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,167
Joined: 6 Oct 2012
Member No.: 57,558



VCS have chosen contract, be good to hear a Judge rule if that's applicable on roads where Bylaws rule, just because VCS have chosen that route does not make it right. Why does Glasgow airport have police patrolling the drop off areas and issuing fixed penalty notices.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nigelbb
post Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 17:37
Post #30


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,274
Joined: 17 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,602



There is no barrier to using contract law even where criminal law also applies. An example would be a restaurant where a diner does not pay the bill. It may be criminal if they just scarper or it may be a civil matter if they refuse to pay because the service was crap. Whether they scarper or refuse they can in both instances be sued for breach of contract.


--------------------
British Parking Association Ltd Code of Practice(Appendix C contains Schedule 4 of POFA 2012 ) & can be found here http://www.britishparking.co.uk/Code-of-Pr...ance-monitoring
DfT Guidance on Section 56 and Schedule 4 of POFA 2012 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...ing-charges.pdf
Damning OFT advice on levels of parking charges that was ignored by the BPA Ltd Reference Request Number: IAT/FOIA/135010 – 12 October 2012
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cuthbert
post Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 17:43
Post #31


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 199
Joined: 27 Dec 2014
Member No.: 74,894



ManxRed, yes, but bargepole advised this defense.

nigelbb Restaurants are not covered by bye laws.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nigelbb
post Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 17:50
Post #32


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,274
Joined: 17 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,602



QUOTE (Cuthbert @ Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 18:43) *
ManxRed, yes, but bargepole advised this defense.

nigelbb Restaurants are not covered by bye laws.

Byelaws are just particular local laws made by councils or other bodies which create criminal offences that can be prosecuted in magistrates' courts. The legal system does not treat byelaw offences any differently to other crimes.


--------------------
British Parking Association Ltd Code of Practice(Appendix C contains Schedule 4 of POFA 2012 ) & can be found here http://www.britishparking.co.uk/Code-of-Pr...ance-monitoring
DfT Guidance on Section 56 and Schedule 4 of POFA 2012 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...ing-charges.pdf
Damning OFT advice on levels of parking charges that was ignored by the BPA Ltd Reference Request Number: IAT/FOIA/135010 – 12 October 2012
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cabbyman
post Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 19:27
Post #33


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5,949
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town.
Member No.: 16,066



Where the driver is not identified, VCS must rely on PoFA to transfer liability to the keeper. As byelaw land is not 'relevant land' PoFA doesn't apply. If the driver is unidentified, this is a defence point that must be included, IMHO.

The only contract that can possibly exist is between VCS and the driver, and even that is a moot point in most situations. VCS can choose to pursue under whichever maxim they wish but the defence has the freedom to plead others.


--------------------
Cabbyman 10 PPCs 0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ManxRed
post Tue, 4 Sep 2018 - 07:39
Post #34


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,268
Joined: 20 Aug 2008
Member No.: 21,992



QUOTE (Cuthbert @ Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 18:43) *
ManxRed, yes, but bargepole advised this defense.


Well, I wouldn't.


--------------------
Sometimes I use big words I don't understand in an effort to make myself sound more photosynthesis.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kommando
post Tue, 4 Sep 2018 - 09:03
Post #35


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,167
Joined: 6 Oct 2012
Member No.: 57,558



Disputing Jurisdiction. Its untried as yet, its at the first step of the process and potentially could stop the claim dead, if it goes the wrong way no harm done as the Small Claim process just starts up again. Only downside is if there is a fee to pay.

This post has been edited by kommando: Tue, 4 Sep 2018 - 09:09
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Tue, 4 Sep 2018 - 09:25
Post #36


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,425
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



There is a fee to pay
Ive said this repeatedly
For those who doubt, check out the gov.uk site, and confirm that the "ticked box" option to contest MUST be followed up by an application made within 14 days. EVERY Application carries a fee - £100 if no hearing is required, £255 if it is.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kommando
post Tue, 4 Sep 2018 - 09:34
Post #37


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,167
Joined: 6 Oct 2012
Member No.: 57,558



So if an English claim gets through served to a Scottish address then if the defendant disputes Jurisdiction they need to pay £100 to stop the claim ?

Previous posts suggest no such requirement in that particular situation hence it cannot be 100% certain a fee is required, likely and best assumed but.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
emanresu
post Tue, 4 Sep 2018 - 09:39
Post #38


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,017
Joined: 24 Aug 2007
Member No.: 13,324



One way to find out is to tick the box, pay no fee and wait to see what the court says. If they let it through then the case will go elsewhere. If the ask for a fee, it defaults to County Court.

The issue for any OP using the byelaws angle is that if they are successful in getting it to a different track, all VCS needs to do is to pay a fee to get the claimant's name changed. Then an OP can try their luck at the Mags court which is a lot more frightening than the simple Country Court.

But press on if you think byelaws argument is the way forward.


--------------------
Where there is a claim - there is a counterclaim.
Are Parking companies misusing your personal data or interfering with your lease? Counterclaims are only £25. Makes them sit up and take notice. For leaseholds, join in the Managing agents too. Since the purpose of these claims is to frighten you, give them something to be frightened of.
Subject Access Requests to the DVLA?Find out who accessed your data and when. Try SubjectAccess.Requests@dvla.gsi.gov.uk. [Apologies if it does not work]
Double Dip / ANPR FaultsThe BPA Report on ANPR Double Dips is here. Ideal case for a counterclaim (see above).
Daily Court List. See who is doing what and where here
Printing and posting Witness Statements. Easy and cheap way DoxDirect
What is court like. A District Judge's view
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Tue, 4 Sep 2018 - 09:57
Post #39


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,425
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



They need to pay £100 to file an application for the court to Hear their claim that the E&W court has no jurisdiction over this matter
It of course, if granted, becomes a cost payable to the Defendant, usually, and as this claim will not have been Allocated to any Track, there is no costs protection and as such the D can claim their full costs at £19 per hour on top of the £100.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Spudandros
post Tue, 4 Sep 2018 - 11:39
Post #40


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 181
Joined: 7 Feb 2016
Member No.: 82,244



QUOTE (ManxRed @ Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 16:29) *
They're not doing both, they're doing contract.

The current Defence at LJLA is, as I understand it, based on contract.


The one going to hearing tomorrow is, as you say, based on contract. Bylaws are a dead duck for anything other than PoFA defence.

QUOTE (kommando @ Tue, 4 Sep 2018 - 10:34) *
So if an English claim gets through served to a Scottish address then if the defendant disputes Jurisdiction they need to pay £100 to stop the claim ?

Previous posts suggest no such requirement in that particular situation hence it cannot be 100% certain a fee is required, likely and best assumed but.


If it goes ahead, the Scottish defendant should request its transferred to his local court.. in Kirkwall.

QUOTE (kommando @ Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 16:39) *
VCS have chosen contract, be good to hear a Judge rule if that's applicable on roads where Bylaws rule, just because VCS have chosen that route does not make it right. Why does Glasgow airport have police patrolling the drop off areas and issuing fixed penalty notices.


I believe the roads around Glasgow Airport are adopted by Renfrewshire Council.

This post has been edited by Spudandros: Tue, 4 Sep 2018 - 11:32
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Saturday, 17th November 2018 - 03:35
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.