Calder Park, Wakefield PCN

l12345

Hi I'm just wondering if someone could give me a little advice regarding a PCN I've been issued over at Calder Park, Wakefield.

The offence occurred about a year ago in a company van in which I stopped for a matter of seconds and once I noticed the no stopping sign I moved on.
The problem is an appeal by IAS didn't go in my favor as the company secretary ignored everything I said and simply stated I was ill! So now I have a company pursuing the "balance" saying that the IAS decision is final.

The real reason is one of the signs entering the park was covered by a parked caravan. I argue that you have to be stopped to fully read and understand the sign, as the sign had small writing at the bottom. Once I had read this I moved on which is what I feel is unfair. I also stated this in my appeal letter that i stopped to read the sign. They have simply put 'you confirm that the vehicle stopped, thus you admit to being in clear violation of the above prohibition'

Could anyone advice me what is the best thing to do?

Umkomaas

Which parking company issued the ticket?

Who is this latest letter from?

l12345

Issued by: Vehicle Control Services Ltd

Letter from BWLegal

pappa_golf

l12345 wrote: »

So now I have a company pursuing the "balance" saying that the IAS decision is final.

correct the IAS appeal is final , as far as micky mouse appeals go , HOWEVER it is far from final in law


if you refuse to pay , VCS may take you go the county court , where it would be heard by a judge , not a barrista employed by the IPC , at which point you can make your case

Quentin

l12345 wrote: »

...So now I have a company pursuing the "balance" ......

See this thread on why there's no need for a new thread on debt collectors:


https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5035663

Northlakes

This is the same scam as at JLA by VCS. I think you will find that the site is owned by Peel Holdings. As JLA there is probably no advertisement consent.

Do the research on the site but it suggests to me that they wouldn't want to do court on this.

Redx

more like the Peel centre in stockport , which is a car park and is "relevant land" , whereas the JLA sc@m and RHA sc@m are airports and "not relevant land"

or its more like the nearby VCS Speke business park "no stopping" sc@m

VCS and Excel do try court cases on "relevant land" car parks , but rarely at airports

Peel Holdings never seem to intervene on a motorists behalf

Castle

Redx wrote: »

more like the Peel centre in stockport , which is a car park and is "relevant land" , whereas the JLA sc@m and RHA sc@m are airports and "not relevant land"

or its more like the nearby VCS Speke business park "no stopping" sc@m

Interesting thought; since the VCS Speke Business park is built on the site of the old Airport, do the byelaws still apply, since they haven't been revoked?

dazster

Byelaws are a red herring, VCS does not rely on PoFA but proceeds on the "reasonable assumption" (their words!) that the RK was the driver.

Northlakes

Castle wrote: »

Interesting thought; since the VCS Speke Business park is built on the site of the old Airport, do the byelaws still apply, since they haven't been revoked?

I was doing some research on an old railway station site and the byelaws applied to railway assets only. So if it's sold off for a non-railway/airport use the byelaws fall is my understanding. I would be delighted to be corrected on this.

Regarding advertisement consent I do know of two court cases which have been pulled and the PPC wasn't prepared to have this tested in court.

Edna_Basher

Calder Park is just a business park located just off Junction 39 on the M1; as dazster points out, byelaws are not relevant in this case.

Given that the vehicle was a company van, I assume that the Notice to Keeper was first sent to your employer's company? Are VCS still pursuing your employer for payment or are they now pursuing you (and if so, did they ever reissue the PCN to you as a Notice to Driver)?

VCS’s PCN will have stated that the driver had agreed to be “contractually bound” upon entering the site to Terms and Conditions that had been clearly placed at the entrance to the controlled area and in prominent places throughout. However, it would be impossible for VCS’s signs to “contractually bind” any driver travelling at 30 mph (i.e. the maximum speed limit on the business park).

A few months ago, with a bit of help from the Parking Prankster, I checked the adequacy of VCS’s signs at Calder Park against Department for Transport (“DfT”) guidelines.

VCS’s standard entrance sign at Calder Park contains 62 words (excluding the small print at the bottom of the sign and the text contained within the graphics on the sign). According to the DfT guidelines, it would take the driver 23 seconds to read these words (and even longer to read the small print). In a vehicle travelling at 30 mph, this is clearly impossible.

Based upon DfT eyesight standards for driving (i.e. the requirement for a driver to be able to read an 8cm number plate at a distance of 20 metres), for a driver travelling at 30mph, the maximum possible reading times for the key wording on the VCS signs would be as follows:

"No Stopping": 2.05 seconds
"£100 CHARGE IF YOU STOP": 0.75 seconds
"PRIVATE PROPERTY": 1.12 seconds
"VEHICLE CONTROL SERVICES LTD": 0.56 seconds

You have highlighted the absurdity that any driver who stops to read and properly understand the Terms & Conditions on VCS’s signs would be deemed by VCS to be in breach of those Terms and Conditions.

I’d be very surprised if VCS were to take a “no stopping” case to Court. Should your case ever get that far, I’m sure there’d be queue of Forum regulars chomping at the bit to assist you.