PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bylaw county court case in favour of defendant but right to appeal granted
93c
post Fri, 7 Feb 2020 - 18:43
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 84
Joined: 25 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,800



Hi
I received a parking charge notice in 2018 and followed all the advice on this forum at the time. It was in a railway car park that is covered by a byelaw and the advice was to appeal on the basis that they should have issued a penalty charge notice, not a parking charge notice. The 6 months passed and they didn't pursue through the magistrates court. However, they proceeded with their claim to the County Court and I complied with all the papers etc and I thought when it came close to the court date they would probably pull out, but they have decided to follow through. I received a chunky set of papers in the post today which is their evidence (84 pages in total) with lots of legal speak and reference to case histories.

They are claiming that my defence is irrelevant and say that just because a byelaw exists, doesn't mean it has to be enforced, and it is the decision of the landowner (Centro at the time) how they charge for parking. They say the railway car park is not shown on the list of highways under the Highways Act 1980 and there's no public right of way and therefore it is private land. They have cited ParkingEye v Beavis 2015 UKSC 67 to say a contract was in place, but that's not my main point.

They have then cited Jones & Tighilt (on behalf of National Taxi Association) v First Greater Western Ltd [2013] EWHC 1485 to say that the byelaw is not compulsory. They are also citing Perth General Station Committe v Ross [1897] AC479 regarding right of way and Baker v Midland Railway Company [1856] 18 CB 46 regarding right of access. They've also cited HHJ McCahill paragraphs 390 and 402 (of which I have no idea what this is referring to). Their conclusion is that byelaws are arbitary and they make reference to the First Greater WEstern Ltd case paragraph 195.

They are seeking £100 for breach of contract and an additional £60 for debt collection fees. My argument on this point is that they haven't mitigated their costs if they have instructed a debt collection agency, although I don't know if they did or not. All the letters have been from VCS. They are also asking for costs, although I know this is unlikely to be awarded in the County Court.

They are also arguing that I chose not to engage in arbitration because they adhere to the IPC code of practice and not the BPA and although they offered IAS, I offered POPLA which they didn't even reply to. They also failed to give me an IAS number. They also claim I didn't engage in communication with them but they have even included in their evidence the emails that I sent them that they failed to respond to throughout the process.

I also haven't had a VAT invoice from them.

I will have to submit my evidence to the court and so I'd really appreciate some help in how to respond to their citations and the matter of the Byelaw in particular. Has anybody won or lost a case based on this defence and are their any past cases I can use to offer my defence?

Thanks (name witheld as I know VCS may be watching this forum)

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4 Pages V  « < 2 3 4  
Start new topic
Replies (60 - 76)
Advertisement
post Fri, 7 Feb 2020 - 18:43
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 13 Feb 2020 - 11:15
Post #61


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,687
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



I woudl suggest
THis is an apparently remote possibility
What DOES come up often is *every other* defence point.
So make sure you cover these thoroughly, and then "keeper" defence is a lot less important.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
93c
post Wed, 20 Jan 2021 - 12:40
Post #62


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 84
Joined: 25 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,800



Hi

I have this morning successfully defended in person a case brought against me by Vehicle Control Services. Thank you to all the people that have provided advice, answered questions or have posted information on here that I've been able to refer to. I used several arguments including abuse of process for the £60 which the judge denied, but he agreed with my argument regarding a railway car park being subject to bylaws and therefore not relevant land under POFA and so dismissed the case, but because he disagreed with my arguments regarding abuse of process I was unable to claim costs.

What information am I allowed to post here? When I get the judgement, can I redact personal information, scan it and post on here? What information would be useful to anybody else?

Then I come to the problem. The judge granted VCS the right to appeal because he believed the POFA law and government guidance for Bylaws were unclear and needed a decision to be made by a higher judge. He told me I can appear in person for the appeal but advised I might want to seek legal advice. I've already lost several days of work preparing my defence for this case and I'm concerned that my costs are going to rise and if the appeal is won by VCS then I could be subjected to costs being awarded against me but more significantly that I'll have to spend time preparing again for a court case, reading through the 84 pages of the original evidence from VCS and my response plus new arguments that they put forward. The representative for VCS said that the result of this case could be far-reaching because it could prevent parking companies from charging on any railway car park. As this could therefore be a very significant appeal, is there any law firm that I can turn to that would help me without charging or any campaign groups or consumer groups that would want to help back me on this appeal?

Thanks.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Wed, 20 Jan 2021 - 15:39
Post #63


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56,198
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



This thread?
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=133100&hl=

We need to know what was claimed and what defence submitted to try and understand the judges 'confusion'.


--------------------
There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!

S172's
Rookies 1-0 Kent

Council PCN's
Rookies 1-0 Warwick
Rookies 1-0 Birmingham

PPC PCN's
Rookies 10-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Wed, 20 Jan 2021 - 20:34
Post #64


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 41,509
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: Planet Earth
Member No.: 49,223



I don't see what's unclear with PoFA. The car park is clearly under statutory control (the signs state it!) so it's not relevant land. Keeper liability does not apply as the law stands.

I think it's a different question that I highlighted in my response - can a contract be formed with the driver?

I believe this case has been picked up off forum...


--------------------
RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution
PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information, SAR=Subject Access Request

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
93c
post Wed, 20 Jan 2021 - 20:42
Post #65


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 84
Joined: 25 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,800



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 20 Jan 2021 - 15:39) *
This thread?
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=133100&hl=

We need to know what was claimed and what defence submitted to try and understand the judges 'confusion'.


Yes, that's the one! I tried everything to find it earlier. I clicked on my profile and the only post I could find was what I've just started today. I searched for 93c and no results came up. What did you do to find it? I can at least update that now with a link to this success.

QUOTE (Jlc @ Wed, 20 Jan 2021 - 20:34) *
I believe this case has been picked up off forum...


Yes, two very helpful people have kindly offered to look into it for me and so I've sent them all 160+ pages of documentation! I believe they only have 21 days from today to submit their appeal and so I'll wait to see if they do.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Wed, 20 Jan 2021 - 21:03
Post #66


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (93c @ Wed, 20 Jan 2021 - 12:40) *
What information am I allowed to post here? When I get the judgement, can I redact personal information, scan it and post on here? What information would be useful to anybody else?

Judgments are generally public unless the court has imposed reporting restrictions, so you can just post the whole thing if you wish. Bailii publishes tens of thousands of judgments and, reporting restrictions aside, they don't redact anything.


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
93c
post Wed, 20 Jan 2021 - 21:06
Post #67


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 84
Joined: 25 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,800



Hi everyone

A massive thank you to everyone who helped me with this. Trial was this morning and I WON!!! I've put information in the successes thread:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showto...p;#entry1612429

It's been nearly 3 years since the parking charge notice was issued!

Thanks, P
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Thu, 21 Jan 2021 - 09:51
Post #68


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56,198
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (93c @ Wed, 20 Jan 2021 - 20:42) *
Yes, that's the one! I tried everything to find it earlier.

Go to your profile and click topics and it will show a list of the topics you started.


--------------------
There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!

S172's
Rookies 1-0 Kent

Council PCN's
Rookies 1-0 Warwick
Rookies 1-0 Birmingham

PPC PCN's
Rookies 10-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
93c
post Thu, 21 Jan 2021 - 10:07
Post #69


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 84
Joined: 25 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,800



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Thu, 21 Jan 2021 - 09:51) *
QUOTE (93c @ Wed, 20 Jan 2021 - 20:42) *
Yes, that's the one! I tried everything to find it earlier.

Go to your profile and click topics and it will show a list of the topics you started.

That's what I tried, and posts too, but only showing this most recent one.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Steve_999
post Thu, 21 Jan 2021 - 10:59
Post #70


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,397
Joined: 12 Jun 2008
From: West Sussex
Member No.: 20,304



QUOTE (93c @ Thu, 21 Jan 2021 - 10:07) *
. . . . .


That's what I tried, and posts too, but only showing this most recent one.


Very strange - this is what I see . . . .



This post has been edited by Steve_999: Thu, 21 Jan 2021 - 11:00
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cabbyman
post Fri, 22 Jan 2021 - 15:09
Post #71


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,898
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town.
Member No.: 16,066



I've asked a mod to merge with existing thread.


--------------------
Cabbyman 11 PPCs 0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cabbyman
post Fri, 22 Jan 2021 - 15:11
Post #72


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,898
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town.
Member No.: 16,066



Due to it being ongoing, I have asked a mod to merge the 'completed case summaries' thread into this one:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showto...p;#entry1612751


--------------------
Cabbyman 11 PPCs 0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
93c
post Fri, 22 Jan 2021 - 15:48
Post #73


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 84
Joined: 25 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,800



QUOTE (Steve_999 @ Thu, 21 Jan 2021 - 10:59) *
QUOTE (93c @ Thu, 21 Jan 2021 - 10:07) *
. . . . .


That's what I tried, and posts too, but only showing this most recent one.


Very strange - this is what I see . . . .




This is what I get:
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
roythebus
post Fri, 29 Jan 2021 - 11:36
Post #74


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,963
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
From: Near Calais
Member No.: 9,683



I'm not sure what I can do to help. I've challenged a few railway bye-law cases and have either had the case dropped or not had a reply to my letters seeking clarification as th whether they were proceeding under bye-lays or POFA or whatever it's called these days.

I suspect the parking company need clarification as does the rest of the country, but I sincerely hope you don't get lumbered with the costs of the appeal.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
reca
post Sat, 6 Feb 2021 - 11:29
Post #75


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 212
Joined: 9 Apr 2020
Member No.: 108,463



I have only just read this, but it seems OP was sued for breach of contract under POFA in county court and matter was allocated to small claims track.

OP won as POFA does not apply. The claimant asked of for permission to appeal and permission was granted.

The matter will now be heard by a circuit judge, probably the designated civil judge.

As regards costs, on small claims track neither side is entitled to these unless the other side has behaved unreasonably, The OP has not behaved unreasonably. He won. If he loses on appeal
that is not unreasonable behaviour.

Has the OP filed a counterclaim for breach of DPA18? Has the OP contacted the Information Commissioner in this regard and asked for an assessment under s165?

Do you have pro bono representation? If not, we need to try and get it. Was the hearing on the Cloud Video Platform? I had one this week, it was very slow.

This post has been edited by reca: Sat, 6 Feb 2021 - 11:45
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
roythebus
post Sun, 7 Mar 2021 - 10:55
Post #76


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,963
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
From: Near Calais
Member No.: 9,683



Going back to post 62, 93C says The judge granted VCS the right to appeal because he believed the POFA law and government guidance for Bylaws were unclear and needed a decision to be made by a higher judge."

How can government give "guidance" on bye-laws? Bye laws are what is on the statute book. It is down to judges to interpret them, not government.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
reca
post Thu, 6 May 2021 - 20:12
Post #77


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 212
Joined: 9 Apr 2020
Member No.: 108,463



Has the OP recd the Notice of Appeal and grounds yet?

There is a time limit of 14 days to file a response.

I am in the same boat as appellant.

OP should get an appeal bundle within 35 days of start of appeal.

3(1)In this Schedule “relevant land” means any land (including land above or below ground level) other than—
(a)a highway maintainable at the public expense (within the meaning of section 329(1) of the Highways Act 1980);
(b)a parking place which is provided or controlled by a traffic authority;
©any land (not falling within paragraph (a) or (b)) on which the parking of a vehicle is subject to statutory control.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V  « < 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: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 21:00
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.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here