vcs liverpool parking charge

nigelbb

Has the OP admitted being the driver? If not VCS cannot pursue the keeper as this is not relevant land as per POFA as bylaws apply and this is most certainly not parking nor an unpaid parking charge so POFA doubly does not apply.

Umkomaas

nigelbb wrote: »

Has the OP admitted being the driver? If not VCS cannot pursue the keeper as this is not relevant land as per POFA as bylaws apply and this is most certainly not parking nor an unpaid parking charge so POFA doubly does not apply.

This is why I suggested he did a search on VCS Humberside as I was sure that particular point was well developed there.

esmerobbo

I am still waiting a definitive answer from the council but Speke Hall Avenue is I believe outside the actual boundary of the Airport.

Peel holdings who did own the airport but only hold a minority share now own all the land around the airport and the land which was the old airport.

They have industrial estates built on this land and VCS have recently started imposing the same restrictions.

Speke hall avenue is public highway except the last part after Dunlop road, where it then runs parallel with the boundary fence until the roundabout where you enter the airport on the left.

Another part of my request to the council is VCS have placed the same signs as are on Speke Hall avenue along Dunlop road prohibiting stopping. Now this is still showing as an adopted public highway.

Coupon-mad

Umkomaas wrote: »

This is why I suggested he did a search on VCS Humberside as I was sure that particular point was well developed there.

The argument is covered here in a Robin Hood Airport thread about VCS:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/62895446#Comment_62895446

posts #17 and 18 discuss this final version of a POPLA appeal, and it does state the issue with it not being 'relevant land' as defined under POFA 2012.

stigg77 your first draft is the shortest POPLA appeal I have ever seen and misses some important points. I think you do need to add some meat to the bones, and add the 'not ''relevant land'' as defined in POFA 2012' point, and the 'can't see signage clearly in moving traffic' point (as on the above link).

We do want you to win so please read some of the links we've given you.

stigg77

Ive actually submitted that appeal now. So I image its too late to add to it.

stigg77

I have just copied and pasted a large paragraph that umkomaas provided a link for and submitted it as evidence via email. Im not sure whether popla will accept it as "evidence" but they offered emails if the file upload via their website wasn't of use....files as in photos etc. Here is what I sent in addition
I believe the charge that UKPC are levying is punitive, contravening the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1997 and therefore void.!The charge of £100 is arbitrary and in no way proportionate to any alleged breach of contract.!The charge UKPC are levying is an unfair term (and therefore not binding) pursuant to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. In particular, Schedule 2 of those Regulations gives an indicative (and non-exhaustive) list of terms which may be regarded as unfair and includes at Schedule 2(1)(e)!"Terms which have the object or effect of requiring any consumer who fails to fulfil his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation."!Furthermore, Regulation 5(1) states that:"A contractual term which has not been individually negotiated shall be regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer"!and 5(2) states:!"A term shall always be regarded as not having been individually negotiated where it has been drafted in advance and the consumer has therefore not been able to influence the substance of the term."This transparently punitive charge by UKPC is a revenue-raising exercise and is therefore unenforceable in law. UKPC's own website is damning in this regard:

stigg77

Note. Ukpc changed to vcs

stigg77

Also when all said and done and whether or not my appeal is the biggest pile of crap anyone has ever seen. . Win or lose.....I ain't paying

Stroma

You can add to the appeal, I gave you one with a lot more meat, why use something after being advised differently? That which you've submitted is likely to fail unless you add.

stigg77

Because the links referred to car parks not a stopping offence so I thought best to choose one more relevant. Plus the foundation of my appeal was based on your advice. I didn't see the need to over elaborate on my point. I doubt the adjudicator will appreciate too much elaboration. I feel the point of my appeal as you recommended was put across.
All advice is useful and appreciated