Court claim by VCS for JLA airport

Marktheshark

What they have sent is designed to Fog you, stick with the Claim form particulars and if this mentions POFA then some on here know if this applies at this site, it usually does not at airports, this may be there undoing.
Which court as well.

rhubarbtriangle

Marktheshark wrote: »

What they have sent is designed to Fog you, stick with the Claim form particulars and if this mentions POFA then some on here know if this applies at this site, it usually does not at airports, this may be there undoing.
Which court as well.

It is at Wakefield court

jkdd77

I believe there is a thread on Pepipoo in which it is confirmed, with links to the relevant byelaws, that parking is covered by statutory authority and hence RK liability does not apply. However, my quick internal search has not managed to uncover the relevant thread.

Furthermore, stopping for a few seconds with the engine running does not constitute "parking", and hence RK liability would not apply anyway, and a charge for "parking" would hence be inapplicable.

In addition, the signage is often woefully inadequate to be read from a moving car, so the OP could not have agreed to any such contract in any case.

Marktheshark

jkdd77 wrote: »

I believe there is a thread on Pepipoo in which it is confirmed, with links to the relevant byelaws, that parking is covered by statutory authority and hence RK liability does not apply. However, my quick internal search has not managed to uncover the relevant thread.

Furthermore, stopping for a few seconds with the engine running does not constitute "parking", and hence RK liability would not apply anyway, and a charge for "parking" would hence be inapplicable.

In addition, the signage is often woefully inadequate to be read from a moving car, so the OP could not have agreed to any such contract in any case.

Can you ask anyone on Peippoo that knows of this link bumps it up or points it out so ther OP can use it in an additional defence

Ralph-y

" i would say we were pretty well prepared in the sense we have compiled a fairly decent defence."

my guess would be that you have done a mitigation defence back to your statement when you have read up;)

The temptation now is for me to type out a whole lot of questions / statements that in all likelihood you would not be aware of ......

I will resist temptation till you better understand.

Ralph:cool:

rhubarbtriangle

Ralph-y wrote: »

" i would say we were pretty well prepared in the sense we have compiled a fairly decent defence."

my guess would be that you have done a mitigation defence back to your statement when you have read up;)

The temptation now is for me to type out a whole lot of questions / statements that in all likelihood you would not be aware of ......

I will resist temptation till you better understand.

Ralph:cool:

No?

Our defence is based essentially on three things:

1. Their charge is not a genuine pre estimate of loss
2. They are an agent and have no right to issue legal proceedings in their own name.
3. The Byelaws over ride them.

Ralph-y

"I believe there is a thread on Pepipoo in which it is confirmed, with links to the relevant byelaws, that parking is covered by statutory authority and hence RK liability does not apply. However, my quick internal search has not managed to uncover the relevant thread.

Furthermore, stopping for a few seconds with the engine running does not constitute "parking", and hence RK liability would not apply anyway, and a charge for "parking" would hence be inapplicable."

yes this is all well known ...... but that has not stopped VCS/ JLA they just claim it is all obsolete!

I amongst others have been complaining about this for many a month ... The DVLA dismiss all such complaints. This may stop after today's anouncement from that nice Mr Pickles

Ralph:cool:

enfield_freddy

this post perhaps http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=97662&st=0


there are others




edit , possibly better http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=97741&hl=



and a refusal to admit if there are any new byelaws https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/243196/response/616709/attach/4/150211%20Emails%20Liverpool%20Airport.pdf


I have personally interviewed 2 ex PCs who worked the Bootle area , and asked them to clarify the extreme points of there ability to act , before the airport police had priority ,


the statements along with a lot of cuttings from Liverpool police are being collated in preparation for a counter claim against VCS/JLA which might cost them a huge amount of money



and the airports history http://www.theterminalhut.com/public/p.pdf

Northlakes

enfield_freddy wrote: »

this post perhaps http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=97662&st=0


there are others




edit , possibly better http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=97741&hl=



and a refusal to admit if there are any new byelaws https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/243196/response/616709/attach/4/150211%20Emails%20Liverpool%20Airport.pdf


I have personally interviewed 2 ex PCs who worked the Bootle area , and asked them to clarify the extreme points of there ability to act , before the airport police had priority ,


the statements along with a lot of cuttings from Liverpool police are being collated in preparation for a counter claim against VCS/JLA which might cost them a huge amount of money



and the airports history http://www.theterminalhut.com/public/p.pdf

The two documents in the first pepipoo thread which are from JLA themselves are clear proof the the 1982 bye laws are in place (otherwise why quote them?).
However this doesn't mean to say that a judge will consider them but in this case the bye laws have specific clause on parking and this should be clearly pointed out to the judge.
Any claim VCS may have would potentially be against the driver only and you have to state clearly that you have made no admission who was driving there is no claim can be possible on not relevant land against the RK.
Others with more court experience will guide you further.

enfield_freddy

the last byelaws held by Liverpool counsil asked for here https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/byelaws_john_lennon_airport




and the CURRANT BYELAWS https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/198654/response/495713/attach/html/4/Byelaws%20for%20Liverpool%20John%20Lennon%20Airport.pdf.html


judge v counsil , bring it on ,,,,,


those document's are now held in either the house of lords or house of commons library