VCS PCN - Help Needed

AB_Express

The PCNs were issued a week apart, didn’t get the first one through the post until after the second alleged offence took place. Wasn’t aware VCS were patrolling the area.

The second PCN is the one I have defended in court. Judge ruled in my favour as the piece of land the PCN was issued on falls outside of what VCS call the no stopping zone. This will form part of my defence for the first PCN.

System

as the piece of land the PCN was issued on falls outside of what VCS call the no stopping zone

So the earlier one can be fought on lack of signs and outwith the area?

A map of the area in question would be very useful to others.

AB_Express

Yes, plus I have the map VCS/BW supplied in their evidence pack with what they class as the no stopping zone.

AB_Express

Letter received today

Coupon-mad

OK can you show us what they sent, and how your defence draft looks?

AB_Express

Draft defence, any feedback greatly appreciated.


I am XXXXXXXX, defendant in this matter.

1. It is likely to be a matter of common ground that this claim arises as the result of an alleged infraction brought about by the stopping of a XXXXXX motor vehicle registration number XXXXX on XXXXXX at the International Business Park, Liverpool that in turn resulted in the issue of a parking charge notice by the Claimant.

2. As the Defendant in this matter, I wish to bring to the courts attention case XXXXXXXX which was successfully defended by myself for a vehicle stopped in the same location a week after this alleged infraction took place. The vehicle, on both occasions was stopped for a matter of minutes outside of what VCS have outlined as the ‘no stopping zone’. Additionally, the alleged contravention of ‘stopping on a roadway where stopping is prohibited’ cannot be applied here as the vehicle was clearly not stopped on a roadway but an unused piece of land.

3. As an unrepresented litigant-in-person I respectfully ask that I be permitted to amend and or supplement this interim defence as may be required following a fuller disclosure of the Claimant’s case.

4. I deny any liability in respect of the claim.

5. In his Particulars of Claim the Claimant fails to disclose the head or heads of action in which these proceedings are based and in any event no cause is disclosed that has a realistic prospect of success. Furthermore, the lack of detail prevents my being able to respond in more detail.

6. The Claimant is a well-funded company with a dedicated legal staff and is a serial litigator. I submit that his issuing Particulars of Claim lacking in usable detail or that do not disclose a clear cause of action is not only remiss but smacks of a “Cut and Paste” approach to the issuing of proceedings. I further submit that this demonstrates a disregard for the dignity of the court and little concern for the Claimant’s duties in supporting the court to achieve the overriding objectives.

7. Additionally such scant Particulars leave Defendants to respond to what are at best vague details.

8. It is denied that the Claimant is the landowner of the property in question or that they have any other right or proprietary interest in the land or any demonstrable intention to occupy it sufficient to support this claim.

9. The Claimant is therefore put to strict proof that they were at the time of the alleged event in possession of sufficient authority to issue parking charges and institute proceedings in their own name and can demonstrate a clear chain of authority from the landowner.

10. I will seek to argue a more detailed rebuttal should the Claimant plead the case cited but in any event submit that the case cited be disregarded.

11. If the court is minded to accept that the Claimant has standing then I submit that the signs on site at the time of the alleged event were insufficient in terms of their numbers, distribution and wording to reasonably convey a contractual obligation and did not in any event at the time comply with the requirements of the Code of Practice of the Independent Parking Committee’s Accredited Operators Scheme a signatory to which the Claimant was at the relevant time.

12. I further submit that anybody would struggle to read the terms, let alone agree to a charge. Such is the complexity and density of the text on the Claimant’s signs that the most onerous term – the £100 parking charge notice – is buried amongst a mass of small print and does not even begin to comply with Denning MR’s “Red Hand Rule”.

13. In the absence of any signage that contractually bound the Defendant then there can have been no contract and the Claimant has no case.

14. The Claimant is put to strict proof of all his assertions.

15. The Court is invited to dismiss the Claim, and to allow such Defendant’s costs as are permissible under Civil Procedure Rule 27.14.

I believe that the facts stated in this Statement of Defence, XXXXXX, are true.

Signed

AB_Express

Few questions...


Do I put anything in about the reg they got wrong on some of their correspondence? A reg that didn't exist.


On the claim form the amount claimed, court fee and legal fees doesn't add up to the total amount? And this amount differs to what they say I owe on the letters.

AB_Express

Coupon-mad wrote: »

OK can you show us what they sent, and how your defence draft looks?

I received a letter informing me a County Court Claim has been issued along with the original Claim Form

AB_Express

Morning all, any pointers / amends on my initial draft of my defence?

Thanks in advance

AB_Express

Any guidance on my draft please?