Caught turning on airport double red lines by camera van

peadar

yotmon wrote: »

Yes, but if you look on Google pics, you will see that particular side road is also governed by the 'deadly' double red lines. Probably bought by the pallet load from B&Q. One thing for sure, it aint reflective paint.

Sure. But the point is that turning in a site entrance (I think it was actually the camera vans' depot!) and waiting for traffic to clear (offroad, at right-angles to any red lines that may have been on the mouth of the site entrance), is not stopping at a kerbside.

peadar

I have been researching the various links and court cases (for which, many thanks), and it occurs to me that the research and consequent correspondence will cost more than £60 of my time.

However, the principle matters: it’s just wrong that red lines can be used around the airport of a major city purely to generate income for a private company and ensure friends and relatives have to pay for picking up and dropping off. If I thought it were feasible to pay the fine without admitting liability and then proactively bring them via the county court to get it back and establish a precedent, I would.

Thanks for the help so far. I'd really appreciate clarification on some points before proceeding:

1. The template response consists of a series of questions requesting further information rather than an appeal as such, setting out a specific case (e.g. signage, turning etc). Also, how does demanding further information square with requesting that they send a Letter before Claim within the next 21 days

2. I wanted to say that it is not my intention to accept or pay the claim under any circumstances other than a court ruling, and request that they apply directly to Court and avoid any further costs to themselves. Apart from this not gelling with the template’s “I will take advice and will respond”, I’ve looked at various threads here and on pepipoo and parking prankster and don’t quite understand why so many people have entered into correspondence with solicitors, debt collectors etc acting on VCS’s behalf. Surely one would just put everything in the bin short of actual court correspondence? Is there a reason why people didn’t do that?

3. It seems that cases have gone to court (e.g. ‘trespass’ was upheld in Ransomes Park v Anderson; VCS vs Ibbotson was not relevant to my case), and that VCS may gain in confidence generally with the Beavis case. It is not clear how likely it is that VCS won’t go to court: some have asserted here that it is highly unlikely, yet there is mention on the forums of fighting funds for court cases.

4. I presume it's ok to respond via the email address provided?

beamerguy

peadar wrote: »

I’ve looked at various threads here and on pepipoo and parking prankster and don’t quite understand why so many people have entered into correspondence with solicitors, debt collectors etc acting on VCS’s behalf. Surely one would just put everything in the bin short of actual court correspondence? Is there a reason why people didn’t do that?

It's because they either do not read on here which is not to bother with debt collectors or they are scared of these plebbies because they think bailiffs will call on them, or they fear they will get a CCJ and their rating will cause problems etc etc.
You name it, these plebbies dream it up as they go.



The "so called" debt collectors have as much power as the backside of a fly.
If anything is going to happen it has to come from PPC and not the plebbies.

NEVER PHONE A DEBT COLLECTOR
NEVER REPLY TO A DEBT COLLECTOR
EXPECT TO RECEIVE THE BOG PAPER THEY DON'T USE WITH BIG RED LETTERS !

AND
NEVER PHONE A PPC OR TELL THEM WHO THE DRIVER WAS

Regarding the Beavis case it is now getting so boring that the plebbies use this as whip to extort money.

It's tempting to ask them .... "what has Beavis got to do with me"

peadar

beamerguy wrote: »

If anything is going to happen it has to come from PPC and not the plebbies.

But would I even need to respond to PPC correspondence other than the original notice asking for money? Would I not just wait for a notice from the county court that VCS had filed a claim?

Quentin

peadar wrote: »

But would I even need to respond to PPC correspondence other than the original notice asking for money? Would I not just wait for a notice from the county court that VCS had filed a claim?

Yes that would be fine.


Though the court won't send you a "notice" - they will just send you a "claim" with 14 days to defend which you can extend to 28 days (all explained in the docs the court send)

Coupon-mad

Yes, you can just wait. I would not waste any more of your time on this right now as long as you have submitted the first appeal (of some sort).

I thought you'd done that this week already?

I recommend NOT bothering to hand them the advantage of an IAS win, because that may well be more likely to be a case cherry-picked by Gladstones one day within the next 6 years for a small claim. Staying under the radar with no IAS attempted is a valid choice by you, staying quietly in their database with thousands of others accumulated over the years and that's where I would be.

beamerguy

peadar wrote: »

But would I even need to respond to PPC correspondence other than the original notice asking for money? Would I not just wait for a notice from the county court that VCS had filed a claim?

Have you not yet appealed

yotmon

Coupon-mad wrote: »

that may well be more likely to be a case cherry-picked by Gladstones one day within the next 6 years for a small claim. QUOTE]

I agree and to be honest, I think they would 'cherry pick' a dead cert for their first dip in the water. Something where a vehicle stops blatantly on the main drag, opens all doors, drops off several passengers and baggage, parks for a decent period of time and causes obstruction to other vehicles. This type of indiscretion can be portrayed to a judge far better than someone stopping as part of a manoeuvre etc.

hoohoo

peadar wrote: »

But would I even need to respond to PPC correspondence other than the original notice asking for money? Would I not just wait for a notice from the county court that VCS had filed a claim?

There is a case for a short letter, especially if it can be emailed and so does not cost you. The reason is to look reasonable in the eyes of the court.

Dear Debt Collector,
I have previously informed the operator the debt is denied. No contravention occurred. The vehicle was turning and not stopped.
Please therefore refer the alleged debt back to the operator.

and after that

Dear DC,
My position is unchanged. [repeat]

Coupon-mad

Agreed - if no appeal has been made so far send something as we've been saying but I then suggest not to bother with the IAS stage, as you've seen already. Not everyone agrees so you do need to make an informed decision, knowing you will lose at IAS and knowing this might buoy VCS into pressing you.

As hoohoo says, an appeal at first - and maybe one short response to any debt collector, as shown, but not protacted correspondence nor time wasted obsessing over those daft letters - will look more reasonable, if they did try a small claim later.