VCS PCN - Help Needed

Draft Order I intend to send along with my WS.




IN THE XXXXXXXXXX COUNTY COURT

Claim No. XXXXXXXXXX

BETWEEN:

XXXXXXXXX Claimant


-- and --


XXXXXXXXXXX Defendant


_____________________________________


DRAFT ORDER

______________________________________


IT IS ORDERED THAT:

Upon reading the Defendant's application dated XXXXXXXXXX.

It is ordered that:

1. The judgment dated XXXXXXXX be set aside.

2. The Defendant shall file and serve its Defence by 4pm following 14 days after the date on which the judgement is set aside.

3. The Claimant do pay the Defendant's costs of this application to the sum of £255.

4. The Claimant has permission to file and serve a reply if so required.

Along with the Draft Order in post #139, I will be sending off the below WS and N244 tomorrow.

Is it good to go?

Do I email BW and VCS to tell them I am applying for a set aside? I am just concerned in that in the last letter from BW informing me of the CCJ they say that if they have not heard from me by Thursday they will enforce the CCJ. This is about 2 weeks before the actual deadline I have to pay in full.

Thanks in advance


I am XXXX XXXX and I am the Defendant in this matter.

This Witness Statement is in support of my application dated XX to:
· Set aside the Default Judgement dated XX as it was not properly served at my current address;
· Order for the Claimant to pay the Defendant £255 as reimbursement for the set aside fee;
· Order for the original claim to be dismissed.


1. Default Judgement
1.1. I understand that the Claimant obtained a Default Judgement against me as the Defendant on XX. I am aware that the Claimant is Vehicle Control Services Limited, represented by BW Legal and that the claim is in respect of an unpaid Parking Charge Notice from the XX at the International Business Park, Liverpool.

1.2. The claim form was not served at my current address and I thus was not aware of the Default Judgement until XX. I understand that this Claim was served at, XXX. However, I moved to a new address at, XX on the XX. In support of this I can provide a scanned copy of a solicitor’s completion statement showing the date of completion and confirmation from XXXX XXXX Borough Council showing my updated details for the purposes of paying Council tax. Both are attached at Exhibit X.

1.3 I also paid the Post Office to redirect my mail for 3 months, from XX to XX. Confirmation email attached at Exhibit X.

1.4. Please see Exhibit X, a copy of my poll card for the most recent General Election, dated 8th June 2017 proving I was on the Electoral Register for my new address.

1.5. I believe the Claimant has behaved unreasonably in pursuing a claim against me without ensuring they held the Defendant’s correct contact details at the time of the claim.

1.6. I also believe it unreasonable of The Claimant to proceed with this claim in 2017 when the original DVLA request took place in June 2014.

1.7. Having already successfully defended Claim No XXXXX against The Claimant on 9th December 2016 for a PCN issued at the same location, I believe that the lack of any response to pre-action correspondence must have at least suggested to them the possibility that I had moved.

1.8. According to publicly available information my circumstances are far from being unique. The industry’s persistent failure to use correct and current addresses results is an unnecessary burden for individuals and the justice system across the country. This is a topical issue: I note that the Justice Minister The Rt Hon Sir Oliver Heald QC MP announced on the 23rd December 2016 a consultation and information campaign to help protect consumers from debt claims. The consultation will look at ways to; “better protect consumers who are sent mail to inaccurate addresses and verify addresses again before a claim is sent.” The Minister added that “In the digital age, we must ensure companies pursuing unpaid debts make every reasonable effort to contact individuals, rather than simply relying on a letter to an old address.”

1.9. On the basis provided above I would suggest that the Claimant did not fulfil their duty to use the Defendant’s current address when bringing the claim.

2.0. Considering the above I was unable to defend this claim. I thus believe that the Default Judgement against me was issued incorrectly and thus should be set aside and I ask the Court to stay the Judgment to avoid it being recorded against me. I also kindly ask the Court to consider the reimbursement of the fee of £255 from the claimant should this request be successful.



2. Order dismissing the Claim

2.1 Again, I refer to Claim No. XXXXXX, XXXX vs. XXXX, date XXXX. This was successfully defended by myself, both Parking Charge Notices issued for a vehicle stopped at the same location, in almost the identical spot. The same circumstances in which Claim No. XXXX was won will apply in this case. I believe this would give a definite chance to successfully defend again should I be required to do so.

2.2. I further believe that the original Claim by the Claimant has no merit and should thus be dismissed. I understand that the Claimant is a Parking Company which seeks to claim for “Parking Charge Notices” which the Claimant believes are due as a result of an alleged breach of contract for parking by a motorist.

2.3. If the Claimant has obtained details of the vehicle for which the Defendant is the Registered Keeper, and used those details to make a claim for a “Parking Charge Notice’’, I thus dispute the claim in its entirety as I do not know the wording of the contract nor do I know the means by which the contract was alleged to come into force.

2.4. The Claimant is required to prove the driver of the vehicle they claim was involved in the alleged incident. I submit that the Claimant cannot provide such evidence and further submit that the Claimant does not include ‘Protection of Freedoms Act 2012’ wording on the Parking Charge Notices they issue and therefore cannot hold the Defendant automatically liable for the alleged incident merely for being the Registered Keeper of a vehicle.

2.5. I further submit that the Claimant’s claim is without merit due to substantial issues in law. This is for the following main reasons:
2.5.1. Lack of Standing by Claimant: The Claimant is unlikely to be the landowner of the car park in question, and will have no proprietary interest in it. This means that the Claimant, as a matter of law, will have no locus standi to litigate in their own name. Any consideration will have been provided by the landholder, and only they would have been able sue for any damages or trespass.
2.5.2. No Loss Suffered by Claimant: Their claim is presumably based on damages for alleged breach of contract. It is a fundamental principle of English Law that a party who suffers damages through breach of contract can only seek through court action to be put back in the same position as they would have been if the breach had not occurred. In order to do so, they must demonstrate their actual, or genuine, pre-estimate of loss. I submit that no loss has been suffered by the Claimant as a result of any alleged breaches of contract on the part of any motorist of the vehicle of which I am the Registered Keeper. I further submit that any loss to the landholder (which would be the only party able to claim such losses) would be at most a few pounds.
2.5.3. Claimed charge is an Unenforceable Penalty: I further submit that the Parking Charge that the Claimant claimed, given it is not based on any loss suffered due to the alleged breach, is nothing but an unenforceable penalty.
2.5.4. No contract with the claimant: Any contract must have offer, acceptance and consideration both ways. There would not have been consideration from the Claimant to the motorist; the fee for parking benefits the landowners, not the Claimant. Therefore, there is no consideration from the motorist to [name of claimant].

2.6. On this basis I believe that the Claimant has not provided any reasonable cause of action and thus the claim should be dismissed in its entirety.