PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

URGENT: VCS PCN/NTK: Flora Street, Sheffield
phil25uk
post Sat, 27 Oct 2018 - 08:35
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 64
Joined: 9 May 2014
Member No.: 70,518



Hello all,

16/09/2018: My car was parked in Flora Street Retail Park, Sheffield, between two cars in a row of cars which appeared properly parked. In retrospect I can see that there are no marked bays in that area, but also no marked parking restriction. My car then had a MyParkingCharge.co.uk sketchy looking 'THIS IS NOT A PARKING CHARGE NOTICE' ticket left on the windshield.

24/09/2018: marked Issue Date on Parking Charge Notice / Notice To Keeper (both at top of page) from VCS, stating Contravention Reason '81) Parked In A Restricted / Prohibited Area'.

I knee-jerk replied via appeal on website that it is not clear that parking is not allowed there, and that my suspicion was that this is intentional to make money. I know this wasn't the right move to make, please don't point that out. I had the following response from VCS:

"We refer to your appeal in respect of the above Charge Notice (CN) received on 27/09/2018.

Having considered the points you have raised and reviewed our records, we are unable to accept your appeal. Our
main reason(s) for this decision are as follows:

The signs at the car park make it clear that the land is private property and that a Charge of £100 will be levied if
vehicles park outside of the Terms and Conditions displayed. The signs in proximity to where the above detailed
vehicle parked clearly indicate vehicles to "park correctly and only between the lines of a single marked bay" the
vehicle parked in that Restricted/Prohibited area of the car park and therefore you became liable for the Charge
advertised.

We maintain that the signs on this site meet the requirements set by the International Parking Community (IPC) Code
of Practice. The signs are large, prominent and legible,so that any reasonable user of the car park would be aware of
their existence and nature, and would have a fair opportunity to read them if he or she wished to do so. It can never
be a defence to a claim in contract law to say, "I did not read the terms", so long as the existence of those terms is
reasonably advertised.We have fully reviewed this case and we are satisfied that the Charge Notice was correctly
issued. We are unable to accept the mitigating circumstances raised in your representations, your appeal is therefore
rejected and the charge will stand; photographic evidence which supports this can be viewed at..."

They want £60 from me by 31/10/2018, or £100 by 14/11/2018.

Points to note:

Time on the windscreen ticket reads 15:40, time on PCN/NTK is 15:41.
I didn't tell them "I did not read the terms", but am guessing this is a standard response from them.
Photographs on website show my car clearly parked between others as though in bays, and every time I have been since there are cars parked there.
Others on this forum have beat tickets for same contravention in same spot but years ago.

Please help out if you can as I feel this spot really is a honey trap. Let me know if you need pictures and I will upload.

Also, reason for delay is that I have been away for a fortnight! Not just been lazy.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
3 Pages V   1 2 3 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Sat, 27 Oct 2018 - 08:35
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
The Rookie
post Mon, 29 Oct 2018 - 06:29
Post #2


Member


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



Nothing you can do now but sit back and file the blizzard of junk mail, you cannot make this go away, but you do not have to pay.

In case they change, go back and get photographs of the signage, both from a distance to show visibility and closer for the exact T&C's.

Yes its a standard response and the time difference is irrelevant as the car was clearly still parked there at 15:41.


--------------------
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
phil25uk
post Mon, 29 Oct 2018 - 08:04
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 64
Joined: 9 May 2014
Member No.: 70,518



Hi Rookie,

Thank you for the reassurance. On what grounds can I just ignore? My main gripe is that it is unjust, but that's not so easy to substantiate.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Mon, 29 Oct 2018 - 08:37
Post #4


Member


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



The grounds are: the dozens of threads here that tell you that their charges are unjust

Do some reading, see what answers you come up with. Ignore is the correct advice, up to a letter before aciton or a court claim form, neither is likely.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
phil25uk
post Mon, 29 Oct 2018 - 08:49
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 64
Joined: 9 May 2014
Member No.: 70,518



Thanks Nosferatu,

I have read through dozens of threads, but am aware that 'just ignore' advice was warned against after a landmark case a few years ago.

But ignore is the easy option anyway so suits me fine!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Mon, 29 Oct 2018 - 13:13
Post #6


Member


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



That "landmark" case didnt change anything for the majority of tickets. Beavis had VERY specific circumstances which most car parks fial to meet.
I didnt say "just" ignore. I said ignore until a specific point. That is because you can do nothing of use before that point.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Mon, 29 Oct 2018 - 13:52
Post #7


Member


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



The ‘landmark’ case didn’t huge the just ignore advice, the protect of freedoms act where you could take advantage of POPLA to kill it off.

Visibility of signage, it’s ability to form a contract and standing still apply to pretty much every case.


--------------------
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
Porcupine
post Mon, 29 Oct 2018 - 18:19
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 83
Joined: 2 Sep 2016
Member No.: 86,846



As you seem to be aware now this car park is a very lucrative honey trap for VCS, particularly the unmarked area were they dish out the tickets for 'parking in a restricted area'.
It wouldn't surprise me one bit if VCS parked 'bait' cars in that spot to entice the unwary driver into also parking there. Then as soon as the driver enters the stores pounce with one of their 'This is not a parking charge' tickets, kerrching!

There is another recent thread

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=123012

And another thread where a poster Marmalade67c (not the OP) mentions (in post #14) they beat a VCS claim at court for the same scam. They won because in their defence they contested as this area of the car park was not marked as a restricted area so the charge was invalid and the judge agreed

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=98198

And another win for the motorist and bloody nose for VCS.

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=107883


I don't know what you put in your appeal to VCS but you should have included the fact that the area is not marked or signed as a restricted area. They would have still dismissed your appeal but it may have helped in a future court claim.

In their rejection letter they should also have offered you the chance to appeal to the IAS. You should avoid this as they are far from impartial and it would be futile.

As said by other posters you will now get debt collectors letters which can be safely ignored, despite their threatening tone. If you eventually receive a 'Letter before claim'. that should be responded to.

This post has been edited by Porcupine: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 - 18:43
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
phil25uk
post Mon, 29 Oct 2018 - 18:40
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 64
Joined: 9 May 2014
Member No.: 70,518



Thank you Porcupine for the thorough and helpful advice. I'll keep a record of it and check back in if and when that 'letter before claim' comes.

I went and photographed the signage again today, as advised, and all signs are over 6 feet off the ground at the bottom, and written in a small font.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
instrumentsofjoy
post Mon, 29 Oct 2018 - 22:22
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 431
Joined: 10 Apr 2011
Member No.: 45,808



I'd take a close look at the signs too. ( I live nearby and never shop there because of the parking weasels)

There used to be a line at the bottom about charging you £10.00 (or a similar figure) - even if your appeal is successful!!

Might be worth posting the sign up here and letting people take a look at it.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
phil25uk
post Tue, 30 Oct 2018 - 13:25
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 64
Joined: 9 May 2014
Member No.: 70,518



"Please be advised that correctly issued Parking Charge Notices which are subsequently cancelled will attract a £10.00 fee."

Attachment uploader is not working on my machine right now.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BigAlC
post Tue, 30 Oct 2018 - 13:29
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 53
Joined: 28 Apr 2015
Member No.: 76,977



Have a look at my thread as well. I'm in final throws before court issuance.

There (as mentioned) are a number of cases where they have lost for the same invoice reason. I'm hoping to add to it. Don't panic at this stage, just keep your eyes open for a Letter Of Claim / Letter Before Claim, and the final Court Issuance document.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Tue, 30 Oct 2018 - 13:29
Post #13


Member


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



Just send it to tinyupic, imgur etc, as the READ FIRST sticky states
They can say whatever they like, they can go whistle if they think anyone is stupid enough to pay the fee.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
phil25uk
post Mon, 19 Nov 2018 - 10:30
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 64
Joined: 9 May 2014
Member No.: 70,518



I received a 'DEMAND FOR PAYMENT' letter, attached here. Will continue to ignore them as recommended until Claim letter arrives, but will keep you guys updated.

Thank you.
[Removed at OP's request]



This post has been edited by Fredd: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 - 15:15
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Yogi_BB
post Mon, 19 Nov 2018 - 11:32
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 36
Joined: 22 Apr 2018
Member No.: 97,626



QUOTE (phil25uk @ Mon, 19 Nov 2018 - 11:30) *
I received a 'DEMAND FOR PAYMENT' letter, attached here. Will continue to ignore them as recommended until Claim letter arrives, but will keep you guys updated.

Thank you.




You need to edit this you've left your name and address on the first picture!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
phil25uk
post Sun, 16 Dec 2018 - 11:14
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 64
Joined: 9 May 2014
Member No.: 70,518



Hello all,

I have now received my 'Letter Before Claim'. There was one payment reminder a week or two ago as well.

What should be my next step? Thank you.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SchoolRunMum
post Sun, 16 Dec 2018 - 17:34
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,751
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Member No.: 32,130



As per the NEWBIES thread on MSE about LBC stage:

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

It's covered in the second post there, about sending a SAR to keep them busy and to see their hand.

And also you will see among the example defences there, a VCS /not a PCN' defence already written, ready for you to adapt for your court claim in 2019. Well worth fighting and all been done before, and no there is no risk in defending.



No CCJ, no huge costs, no nothing. Well worth genning up on ahead of time.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
phil25uk
post Mon, 17 Dec 2018 - 13:05
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 64
Joined: 9 May 2014
Member No.: 70,518



Hello all,

I have sent an SAR to VCS's Data Protection Officer, with the specific requests listed on the MSE post. I also followed it up with a request sent to info@ VCS and litigation@VCS to put the case on hold pending response to SAR.

I have researched the landowner of Flora Street Retail Park, and it looks like (from other posts here/MSE) they are called Eddisons and that they are unwilling to help in any parking cases.

Should I just sit tight for responses to my e-mails now?

Thank you.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BigAlC
post Mon, 17 Dec 2018 - 13:25
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 53
Joined: 28 Apr 2015
Member No.: 76,977



Rebut it strongly.

State the onus is on VCS that they need to prove that the area is restricted ( I presume you have photos of the area when you parked showing no such restricted area).

They have lost numerous times on restricted area within this car park. You can reference their loss on the 1/2/17 in front of District Judge Roebuck at Sheffield. Whilst the case cannot be used in small claims, it shows you know that they have lost and the outcome (in their own words) "is likely to be the same again".

I'd also suggest working through my thread, I had a LBC and am currently on hold after a VERY robust response.

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showto...98552&st=80
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
phil25uk
post Fri, 21 Dec 2018 - 09:48
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 64
Joined: 9 May 2014
Member No.: 70,518



That's great, thank you BigAIC. I have read through your post (had already seen the thread on MSE) and am happy to proceed down the 'not marked as restricted' route, and will use some of your wordings.

VCS were very quick in responding to my SAR, with a full PDF containing everything they hold on me. Not very enlightening to be honest, and didn't hold up proceedings at all.

How do I respond to the LBC? I read in your thread BigAIC that you don't have to use the forms. So how do I respond? Direct to the 'litigation' e-mail address?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >
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 - 23:55
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