Vehicle Control Services - Court Claim Form

DollyDee_2

After googling, someone posted about this place on parkingticketfines.com. They received a ticket in March 2015 when they were installing a staircase in the pub! The pub had 4 permit spaces but 3 permits were out and they couldn't find the other one. Not long after the pub were "granted" (can't think of a better word) 10 permit free spaces. According to that poster, the car park is owned by a local businessman who also owns retail parks etc.

According to the Pub's website, the manager is Martin Roper and his partner Denise. Would it be worth a visit, claim form in hand plus proof of dining there (if OP paid by credit/debit card and has a statement) and complaining robustly? They gave him the bad advice in the first place and this is the result.

Or, if a visit is not possible, a formal letter of complaint to the manager with copies of claim form/proof of dining asking them to intervene? Copied to the Dancing Duck brewery.

OP what parking controls did you allegedly breach?

System

What's the relevance you see in an out of date clamping sign that leads to advising the op to contact them and offer £125??

Its an indication that some form of parking control has been in force for some time. Also the pub must know there are issues with the location so you may ask why there are not warnings about it for their customers.

All these cases turn on the visual evidence (signs/terms) in front of the OP. There is the "it was dark" and "I did not see the signs" arguments, but IMHO it would be a tough sell in court.

But as usual it will be for the OP to decide if they can convince the judge on the signs issue or something more technical e.g. contracts in place.

Quentin

IamEmanresu wrote: »

Its an indication that some form of parking control has been in force for some time. Also the pub must know there are issues with the location so you may ask why there are not warnings about it for their customers.

All these cases turn on the visual evidence (signs/terms) in front of the OP. There is the "it was dark" and "I did not see the signs" arguments, but IMHO it would be a tough sell in court.

But as usual it will be for the OP to decide if they can convince the judge on the signs issue or something more technical e.g. contracts in place.

The ancient clamping sign you spotted is pretty irrelevant isn't it?

DollyDee_2

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4741216

Found it on MSE now. Posted in 2013 but for some reason it shows as 2015 on parkingticketfines.com.

Herzlos

IamEmanresu wrote: »

Its an indication that some form of parking control has been in force for some time.

It's an indication that there's been a clamping sign for some time, but that it's probably not being enforced or actively managed (or they'd have replaced the sign 4 years ago when clamping became illegal).

Presumably VCS have only just started chasing tickets here so up until that point the landlords suggestion of ignoring it was correct as far as he could tell.

This looks like a pretty easy one to beat in court, if you want the hassle:

* There's essentially no signage
* It looks like more or less any other back-of-pub parking
* The parking warden presumably witnessed the driver parking and never said anything.
* There's no commercial justification
* It's unlikely VCS own the site or have a proper contract
* There's no keeper liability
* It's (seemingly) a permit-only site, so no contract to park without a permit, so can only be trespass.

This is going to be a hard one for VCS to win if it's defended properly.

fisherjim

Since clamping is illegal, I doubt they would bring up that signage in court!

System

The ancient clamping sign you spotted is pretty irrelevant isn't it?

Is your view theoretical or do you have experience of what judges might infer from photos they are presented with?

bod1467

I would have thought a judge would accept a sign as being illegal* once properly directed to the relevant legislation.

* illegal (as in a sign threatening a criminal act), not unlawful (a sign advising of a civil wrong/tort), as far as I am aware.

Quentin

IamEmanresu wrote: »

Is your view theoretical or do you have experience of what judges might infer from photos they are presented with?

If you could explain to the op and us why you say that this irrelevant old sign you have spotted means the op should offer £125 to settle it would help everyone!

Why do you see the claimant using it to ensure a sure fire win in court?

System

Is your view theoretical or do you have experience of what judges might infer from photos they are presented with?

Why not answer the question?