VCS parking ticket at the gym.

Dee140157

I think he means the day by which he should pay the invoice before it eg "goes up".

All irrelevant since he is putting in an appeal to POPLA.


Regarding appeal. Miss section 3 out put out in a whole new section on ANPR accuracy . Crib from another appeal.

Then should be ok to go.

Redx

Danbor wrote: »

POPLA deadline is in 12 days, tomorrow's VCS deadline.

if you submit a popla appeal now, or within the next 11 days, it will take popla 5 to 8 weeks to rule on it

hence nobody here cares about any deadlines imposed by VCS, sorry to say

winning at popla is what matters, so follow their timeline, not the PPC timeline

its not over until the fat lady sings, in this case it will be your tune which will resemble the one for V for Victory or GO NOW by the Moody Blues and the VCS tune will be Crying by Roy Orbison

Danbor

Dee140157 wrote: »

I think he means the day by which he should pay the invoice before it eg "goes up".

All irrelevant since he is putting in an appeal to POPLA.


Regarding appeal. Miss section 3 out put out in a whole new section on ANPR accuracy . Crib from another appeal.

Then should be ok to go.

Thanks Dee, very helpful.

Danbor

Redx wrote: »

if you submit a popla appeal now, or within the next 11 days, it will take popla 5 to 8 weeks to rule on it

hence nobody here cares about any deadlines imposed by VCS, sorry to say

winning at popla is what matters, so follow their timeline, not the PPC timeline

its not over until the fat lady sings, in this case it will be your tune which will resemble the one for V for Victory or GO NOW by the Moody Blues and the VCS tune will be Crying by Roy Orbison

Thanks Redx, I really hope that's how things will pan out. One last question: do you think making a point about the VCS lying about what the wording in the signage actually say, will add anything of relevance to the case? Apologies for being such a pain!

Coupon-mad

As the registered keeper

You can't start with that as you aren't the registered keeper. Change to 'I was the driver and'.

Remove the whole of point 3 including the sentence you didn't put in orange.

Instead make point #3 the one about ANPR which you will find in various other POPLA examples such as a ParkingEye one. Assuming this was a postal PCN!

Danbor wrote: »

Thanks Redx, I really hope that's how things will pan out. One last question: do you think making a point about the VCS lying about what the wording in the signage actually say, will add anything of relevance to the case? Apologies for being such a pain!

Not really but no harm in it - and you can attach a pic or two of those signs and I think you should expand this:

In this case, the driver maintains that the wording in the signage was unclear and vague, leading to obvious misinterpretations. (that’s my argument against the signage) I THINK YOU NEED TO EXPLAIN WHAT YOU UNDERSTOOD BY THE WORDING - THAT YOU ONLY HAD TO REGISTER ONCE, NOT EVERY TIME YOU PARK.

Leave this in:
Accordingly I contend that any signs must have been unclear to the point that any core parking terms VCS are relying on were not sufficiently prominent for the driver to discern before parking. Signage must also fail to comply with the BPA Code of Practice requirements. I put VCS to strict proof of clear signs at the entrance and all around this car park. Any photographic evidence must be taken at a similar time of day/light level as in my case.

Danbor

Coupon-mad wrote: »

You can't start with that as you aren't the registered keeper. Change to 'I was the driver and'.

Remove the whole of point 3 including the sentence you didn't put in orange.

Instead make point #3 the one about ANPR which you will find in various other POPLA examples such as a ParkingEye one. Assuming this was a postal PCN!


Not really but no harm in it - and you can attach a pic or two of those signs and I think you should expand this:

In this case, the driver maintains that the wording in the signage was unclear and vague, leading to obvious misinterpretations. (that’s my argument against the signage) I THINK YOU NEED TO EXPLAIN WHAT YOU UNDERSTOOD BY THE WORDING - THAT YOU ONLY HAD TO REGISTER ONCE, NOT EVERY TIME YOU PARK.

Leave this in:
Accordingly I contend that any signs must have been unclear to the point that any core parking terms VCS are relying on were not sufficiently prominent for the driver to discern before parking. Signage must also fail to comply with the BPA Code of Practice requirements. I put VCS to strict proof of clear signs at the entrance and all around this car park. Any photographic evidence must be taken at a similar time of day/light level as in my case.

Thanks a million!

hoohoo

Make the signage argument stronger by stating utccr 1999 clause 7 states ambiguous terms must be interpreted in the most favourable way to the consumer. Here this means you only need to register once.

wigannwuk

The local press are involved now - a member im in touch with had their pic taken outside the gym yesterday.

Xercise4less emailed me yesterday out the blue after ignoring my last 10 saying the signs are being changed and they will update me. What does that mean to me if the PCN's are still active?

bazster

I'd suggest asking them again to get them cancelled.

Danbor

wigannwuk wrote: »

The local press are involved now - a member im in touch with had their pic taken outside the gym yesterday.

Xercise4less emailed me yesterday out the blue after ignoring my last 10 saying the signs are being changed and they will update me. What does that mean to me if the PCN's are still active?

No way! That's awesome, now maybe they'll move a bit for their costumers. Maybe we should start a group of all those affected by VCS in xercise4less, and that way put more pressure on them.