PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Vehicle Control Services, County Court Claim Form issued 18 April
flabbergasted
post Wed, 9 May 2018 - 21:52
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56
Joined: 2 May 2018
Member No.: 97,790



Hi All,

We received an ANPR Parking Charge Notice in the post back in July last year. It was showing the time of car entering and leaving carpark, 20 minutes without displaying a ticket. At the time we couldn't even work out what carpark it was, as in their correspondence it reads: Albert Street Birmingham B5 5JH. The postcode is showing the address to be Park Street, not Albert Street. So we ignored their letters. Unfortunately, only kept the Letter Before Claim and all the subsequent ones: County Court Claim form (which was aknowledged in the 14 days) and Detailed Particulars. In Detailed Particulars there are no pictures nor real details of the alleged contravention, except for:
"The Defendant s been issued with a CN for failure to adhere to the advertised T&C s at a development(s) known as Albert Street B5 5JH on June 3 2017. The offer advertised by way of the T&Cs was accepted by conduct." etc signed by Jake Burgess

So, it's now down to writing a defence and prepare for the courts. As June 3rd was Saturday, the driver was only there looking to park and left without parking.
Any suggestions on what to focus on in the defence, much appreciated.
To add, County Court Claim Form was issued 18th April 2018.

Thank you all

This post has been edited by flabbergasted: Wed, 9 May 2018 - 22:52
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
7 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 > »   
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 39)
Advertisement
post Wed, 9 May 2018 - 21:52
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Redivi
post Thu, 10 May 2018 - 22:40
Post #21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,941
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



Dear Sir

Ref : ****

I have received your Claim (Reference) dated *****

I no longer possess a number of the documents relevant to this claim
Please send me copies of all the documents you have sent including the windscreen notice if one was attached to the vehicle.

In order to understand my position and write my defence, I also require the following information by (date) :

******
*****
******
etc

When these are supplied, please also confirm whether the intended action is founded on a contractual charge, a breach of a contract or trespass
Please confirm that your contract with the land-holder includes specific authority to issue parking notices and take legal action, and that this will be produced for the court.
I also require an explanation for the additional £** charge including confirmation that it has already been invoiced and paid.

Please regard this letter as a formal request under CPR 18 and 31.14 to provide the information and documents

Although the claim is for a sum that should be allocated to the Small Claims track, this has not yet occurred.
The provisions of CPR 27(2) are therefore of no effect and you should not seek to avoid compliance with your CPR 31 duties by claiming otherwise.

The documents and information will be essential to prepare a defence and the request is entirely in accordance with the Over-riding Objective and CPR 1.1(2)(a).

I look forward to your response

Yours Faithfully
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
flabbergasted
post Thu, 10 May 2018 - 23:00
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56
Joined: 2 May 2018
Member No.: 97,790



QUOTE (Redivi @ Thu, 10 May 2018 - 23:40) *
Dear Sir

Ref : ****

I have received your Claim (Reference) dated *****

I no longer possess a number of the documents relevant to this claim
Please send me copies of all the documents you have sent including the windscreen notice if one was attached to the vehicle.

In order to understand my position and write my defence, I also require the following information by (date) :

******
*****
******
etc

When these are supplied, please also confirm whether the intended action is founded on a contractual charge, a breach of a contract or trespass
Please confirm that your contract with the land-holder includes specific authority to issue parking notices and take legal action, and that this will be produced for the court.
I also require an explanation for the additional £** charge including confirmation that it has already been invoiced and paid.

Please regard this letter as a formal request under CPR 18 and 31.14 to provide the information and documents

Although the claim is for a sum that should be allocated to the Small Claims track, this has not yet occurred.
The provisions of CPR 27(2) are therefore of no effect and you should not seek to avoid compliance with your CPR 31 duties by claiming otherwise.

The documents and information will be essential to prepare a defence and the request is entirely in accordance with the Over-riding Objective and CPR 1.1(2)(a).

I look forward to your response

Yours Faithfully


Ah thank you so much, Redivi.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
flabbergasted
post Thu, 10 May 2018 - 23:28
Post #23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56
Joined: 2 May 2018
Member No.: 97,790



A question: "I also require an explanation for the additional £** charge including confirmation that it has already been invoiced and paid".
what does this refer to?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Fri, 11 May 2018 - 00:07
Post #24


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,941
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



QUOTE (flabbergasted @ Fri, 11 May 2018 - 00:28) *
A question: "I also require an explanation for the additional £** charge including confirmation that it has already been invoiced and paid".
what does this refer to?

The £60 debt collection charge
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
flabbergasted
post Fri, 11 May 2018 - 21:39
Post #25


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56
Joined: 2 May 2018
Member No.: 97,790



Hi,

Would you say this roughly outlined defence is a valid one to expand on? Any advice, much appreciated.

1) I am the Defendant for this matter, the Defendant’s name is xx, the registered keeper of vehicle registration xxx.

2) The claim seemingly relates to an alleged incident in Albert Street, Birmingham, B5 5JH from, for non-payment of a required fee.

3) It is believed that the postcode, B5 5JH noted by the claimant is for a different parking area than the one noted on the claim. On google map, the postcode comes under the Park Street.

4) The motorists recollection is of entering a private car parking area, traversing the site looking for a space to park and being unable to do so. The motorist then left the site. As it was an extremely busy period this took some time with all other traffic about.

5) It is thought that the grace periods offered by all Parking companies for all parking sites cover such circumstances. No debt is or ever has been due.

6) The Claimant is asked to prove the legitimacy of signage present on site and that it has been audited by their Accredited trade association and signed off as being compliant as well as proof that the required advertisement consent was in place for such business operations at the site.

7) The Claimant is put to proof that the charge has been issued according to the regulations of the protection of freedom act 2012 Schedule 4.

8) POFA Schedule 4 Paragraph (5) does not allow for more than the original charge to be collected.

9) The Defendant questions that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. The proper Claimant is the landowner. Strict proof is required that there is a chain of contracts leading from the landowner to Vehicle Control Services ltd and that Vehicle Control Services ltd have the locus standi to bring this matter to court.

10) The defendant believes that no charge is due as the vehicle was never parked upon this site after failing to find a vacant space. Time present was used to manoeuvre safely about the site whilst trying to locate a space to park.

11) No breach of contract has occurred as the vehicle was unable to accept the offer to park for any charge as specified. The car park was full and no notice of this was in place alerting motorists to that fact.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Fri, 11 May 2018 - 21:46
Post #26


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,433
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



Perhaps rather than using google maps as the street reference provide a print of a royal mail lookup. this sort of page Being a semi official organisation it might just carry more weight.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
flabbergasted
post Fri, 11 May 2018 - 21:49
Post #27


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56
Joined: 2 May 2018
Member No.: 97,790



QUOTE (ostell @ Fri, 11 May 2018 - 22:46) *
Perhaps rather than using google maps as the street reference provide a print of a royal mail lookup. this sort of page Being a semi official organisation it might just carry more weight.

Good point. I'll check out the link. Thank you.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
flabbergasted
post Fri, 11 May 2018 - 22:59
Post #28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56
Joined: 2 May 2018
Member No.: 97,790



QUOTE (ostell @ Thu, 10 May 2018 - 10:58) *
Their particulars of Claim is embarrassing in its lack of detail

"You should not have to assume anything for the case. If it's not clear then say so in your defence and say you cannot determine the exact location of the alleged breach, whatever it was, so makes it difficult to defend."


Exactly. Ill have to make a bigger fuss of that in my defence as thats the most important point.

If the signage is Excel in big readable characters then that is who the contract is with.

Ive attached pics of closeups of the carpark signs where VCS is mentioned. Its ridiculous that motorists are having to study these signs so hard to work out the legality of the points made on them.

This post has been edited by flabbergasted: Fri, 11 May 2018 - 23:00
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
Attached Image
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Sat, 12 May 2018 - 02:08
Post #29


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 39,711
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



Why not mention that they have a car park in Freemason street in that post code?

You’ve not raised standing at all, given this used to be an Excel car park it’s likely that VCS have no standing but just ‘took over’.

You’ve not raised the fact the car park used to be run by Excel and asking them to show that it was run by VCS on the day in question, in fact you can still pre buy spaces via Excel for that car park. Check the last GSV filming date!

This post has been edited by The Rookie: Sat, 12 May 2018 - 02:10


--------------------
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 8-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Sat, 12 May 2018 - 07:10
Post #30


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,433
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



The bottom of that sign gives the full details of Excel, ie company number etc. Therefore it is with Excel that the contract was created. Vehicle Control Services do not legally identify themselves on the sign such that a contract could have been created with them.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
flabbergasted
post Sat, 12 May 2018 - 07:17
Post #31


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56
Joined: 2 May 2018
Member No.: 97,790



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sat, 12 May 2018 - 03:08) *
Why not mention that they have a car park in Freemason street in that post code?

You’ve not raised standing at all, given this used to be an Excel car park it’s likely that VCS have no standing but just ‘took over’.

You’ve not raised the fact the car park used to be run by Excel and asking them to show that it was run by VCS on the day in question, in fact you can still pre buy spaces via Excel for that car park. Check the last GSV filming date!


Thank you, all duly noted. Will be working on adding more. I guess I only focussed on Park street as thats what comes up under the postcode in the claim. They also mention Albert Street "Development", no idea what that means at all?

Regarding VCS standing or taking over, do you think what they mention on the signs (pics of which i attached before) is not enough? Its all made to be so complicated with VCS/Excel and this carpark, all the confusion probably on purpose to confuse and force the average motorist to give up and pay up.

I wouldnt know how to go about the last point you mention. GSV filming stands for google street view? Am still studying other cases and making notes. Though fully aware the time is ticking by.

This post has been edited by flabbergasted: Sat, 12 May 2018 - 07:18
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Sat, 12 May 2018 - 07:25
Post #32


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 39,711
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



Well from that sign VCS may be able to claim interest and additional costs - but not the original sum, while Excel may be able to claim the original sum but not the interest and other costs.

A bizarre arrangement under any normal circumstance (the alternate reality of PPC's excluded) but if they can argue that the signs created a contract, they wrote that contract and so have to abide by what they wrote. If the money was owed to Excel though its hard to understand on what basis VCS could claim those items as they have never offered an invoice so could not have incurred either. In addition as the £60 made up costs are clearly a penalty by nature and they don't form part of the core contract term (where is the costs sum mentioned, they don't have carte blanche to pluck a number from thin air) then they are still stuffed!

This post has been edited by The Rookie: Sat, 12 May 2018 - 07:26


--------------------
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 8-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
flabbergasted
post Sat, 12 May 2018 - 07:34
Post #33


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56
Joined: 2 May 2018
Member No.: 97,790



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sat, 12 May 2018 - 08:25) *
Well from that sign VCS may be able to claim interest and additional costs - but not the original sum, while Excel may be able to claim the original sum but not the interest and other costs.

A bizarre arrangement under any normal circumstance (the alternate reality of PPC's excluded) but if they can argue that the signs created a contract, they wrote that contract and so have to abide by what they wrote. If the money was owed to Excel though its hard to understand on what basis VCS could claim those items as they have never offered an invoice so could not have incurred either. In addition as the £60 made up costs are clearly a penalty by nature and they don't form part of the core contract term (where is the costs sum mentioned, they don't have carte blanche to pluck a number from thin air) then they are still stuffed!


I honestly cant get my head around all that. An average motorist shouldnt stand infront of these parking signs and fish for legal loopholes.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Sat, 12 May 2018 - 07:43
Post #34


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,433
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



But VCS have not legally identified themselves on the sign so haw can you have any possible contract with them to pay them anynting? The alleged contract was with Excel so why are VCS taking court action?

For POFA to apply 9 (2) (a) requires them to identify the relevant land. That they have not done. They have given 3 different locations so how is the keeper to know which location they are refereing to.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Sat, 12 May 2018 - 07:44
Post #35


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 39,711
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



Indeed, which is why if there is ambiguity in a contract (signs) then it has to be interpreted in the customers favour.

So VCS may be able to claim interest (on what, they've never sent you an invoice) and costs they can justify, but can't claim the original amount owed as that isn't in the contract anywhere, that's for Excel to claim.


--------------------
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 8-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
flabbergasted
post Sat, 12 May 2018 - 08:04
Post #36


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56
Joined: 2 May 2018
Member No.: 97,790



And this is the entrace to the carpark. How is the driver supposed to read that whilst entering carpark? also, the sign is placed outside the fence of the carpark, so surely it cant even be taken into consideration?
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Sat, 12 May 2018 - 08:16
Post #37


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,433
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sat, 12 May 2018 - 08:44) *
So VCS may be able to claim interest (on what, they've never sent you an invoice) and costs they can justify, but can't claim the original amount owed as that isn't in the contract anywhere, that's for Excel to claim.

But there can be no liability to VCS at all as they have not fully identified themselves to be able to create a contract. No company number, no address, no nothing.


Also is that the alleged car park or the car park identified by the post code? Since there's 3 possible locations perhaps GSV or photos of all 3.

There's another claim in process at the same location this thread

This post has been edited by ostell: Sat, 12 May 2018 - 08:18
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
flabbergasted
post Sat, 12 May 2018 - 08:43
Post #38


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56
Joined: 2 May 2018
Member No.: 97,790



QUOTE (ostell @ Sat, 12 May 2018 - 09:16) *
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sat, 12 May 2018 - 08:44) *
So VCS may be able to claim interest (on what, they've never sent you an invoice) and costs they can justify, but can't claim the original amount owed as that isn't in the contract anywhere, that's for Excel to claim.

But there can be no liability to VCS at all as they have not fully identified themselves to be able to create a contract. No company number, no address, no nothing.


Also is that the alleged car park or the car park identified by the post code? Since there's 3 possible locations perhaps GSV or photos of all 3.

There's another claim in process at the same location this thread


Thx Ostell. Thats the thing with their misleading address. We are having to only go with the assumption its the carpark right next to Moor street train station, as signs on that carpark read as 'Albert street'. The postcode on the claim is whole other world of different streets and carparks around there lol
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Sat, 12 May 2018 - 09:06
Post #39


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 39,711
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (ostell @ Sat, 12 May 2018 - 09:16) *
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sat, 12 May 2018 - 08:44) *
So VCS may be able to claim interest (on what, they've never sent you an invoice) and costs they can justify, but can't claim the original amount owed as that isn't in the contract anywhere, that's for Excel to claim.

But there can be no liability to VCS at all as they have not fully identified themselves to be able to create a contract. No company number, no address, no nothing.


Bottom of the second scan? VAT and Co. number, admittedly no other ID. It all just emphasises how truly ludicrous the signage is.

And I did say MAY.......


--------------------
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 8-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Sat, 12 May 2018 - 09:11
Post #40


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,433
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



Sorry, must be blind, didn't see those details. So does the sign have the usual large Excel logo at the top right? I don't believe you can make a contract with 2 entities at the same time so use the one that is apparent, ie the largest.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

7 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, 20th October 2018 - 07:34
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.