Vehicle Control Services - Court Claim Form

Quentin

rjr2016 wrote: »

By the way, I just got home from work and had a letter from 'bwlegal' confirming that they are tand to call them straight away to arrange payment.This indicates to me that they are using the court claim form to scare me into paying, which I must admit almost worked last night when I first got In.

In your op you say have received a claim from the Court.

This isn't a bluff to scare you into paying.

They have now paid out to the Court to commence the legal action and this needs you to no longer consider it a scare tactic.

Quentin

IamEmanresu wrote: »

But press on with your quality advice.

Your jibe aimed at us is unnecessary


You introduced the topic that an old clamping sign you had spotted lead you to advise the OP to make an offer of £125 to settle, and we have simply asked you why this sign is so significant.

HO87

Quentin wrote: »

In your op you say have received a claim from the Court.

This isn't a bluff go scare you into paying.

They have now paid out to the Court to commence the legal action and this needs you to no longer consider it a scare tactic.

With respect to the OP who is probably enjoying his first contact with the small claims process I suspect that the comment represents little more than whistling in the dark. Few OP's in my experience ever think the companies will follow through and whilst there is some basis for that view it certainly isn't one a wise man would build a strategy on.

Herzlos

IamEmanresu wrote: »

As regards the case, the judge will look at the pics and the first question he/she will ask, is does this look like a car park. The marked bays give it away. And what does a normal person do when they get to a car park which is look for the signs.

Doesn't all the precedent point to the fact that the sigange has to be unmissable for it to be consered to be accepted by performance, rather than it being up to the driver (who hasn't been identified) to search out what appears to be a single small unlit sign.

Going by your logic above, no case is winnable where there's a sign. Why is this invoice so different?

Plus, does just the presence of the sign make a difference here since it's (a) unlit and unreadable (b) illegal [in that it seems to mention clamping] and (c) forbidding, so not offering a contract for parking.

I've personally been parking in scrap ground and car parks near pubs for over a decade and have never actively looked out for signs. How much effort do you think the judge would require the unnamed driver went to to identify a parking contract? a torch?

Coupon-mad

IamEmanresu is simply saying what a Judge will consider, as regards looking for contract terms. He does know the score.

IamEmanresu wrote: »

Try the pub themselves and see if they can get this sorted. They may not own the car park but they may know who does and get them to cancel.

http://www.exeterarms.co.uk/contact-us.php

What happened with the complaint to the landowner, OP?

And please confirm you have acknowledged the claim and are working on reading other defences (shown in lots of threads here) to prepare a similar strong one for your case. You cannot keep ignoring or you will get a CCJ. You must defend or pay or make and offer/resolve it. We prefer a robust defence (rather than paying this lot) and can help but you need to read other threads and realise this is real and needs some work & research.

rjr2016 wrote: »

The Deep - I've seen people say they've used £19/hour when charging their own time - is this backed up by any legal guidelines?

Indeed, there have been cases where judges have agreed exemplary damages due to unreasonable behaviour, the rules are here (see 14(2)(g)

But I doubt that this will ever get to court, the PPC will almost certainy wimp out as they have a threadbare case. Warn them of the financial consequence should they persist and you prevail.

---

Thanks for the advice. Sounds like my options are:
1) respond to the court claim form and reject the claim. Hand judge my expenses in the court.
2) respond to the court claim form, reject the claim and make a counter claim.

I'm leaning more towards option 1) because if I take option 2) then BW legal / VCS won't know that I am claiming off them. I don't want to contact them separately via phone or email as I imagine they are not going to be reasonable people and therefore it probably will not achieve a lot.

A counter claim isn't recommended, has little chance of success. IamEmanresu knows what he is talking about 100% so heed his warnings about the way a Judge will look at it in the hearing (which is fairly likely to happen unless the signage is so rubbish that VCS and BW Legal decide it can't win).

rjr2016

I've just submitted the form online to let the court know I will be defending the whole claim. I will put together my defence over the weekend and post it on here to see what you all think before I submit it. Thanks all.

yotmon

Seeing as the signs say 'Permit holders only', have you established who are these permit holders. Are they nearby residents or workers that benefit from parking on the land, or is it a fictitious way of giving the land some credence as a parking area with a legitimate use. It would be good to view their evidence pack to see if it mentions how many permits have been issued, as they are basically saying that by parking there, you have taken a permit holder's space.

rjr2016

All,
Here is the defence case I've put together. This is the first time I've had such a parking issue so I don't know how good it is. Please feel free to give lots of comments!

"I visited the Exeter Arms pub on 31st March 2015 with my fianc!e. We got there at approximately 17:30 to have a dinner on our way home from work. It was a cloudy and grey day so we drove straight to the pub rather than going home first and walking there.
I had visited the Exeter Arms on many occasions before but had always walked there. On my various visits I had noticed the car park but had never needed to park there until now. I had never seen any warning signs stating that this car park was not meant for Exeter Arms customers.
On 31st March we pulled into the car park. All of the surrounding buildings are derelict and I did not see any signage stipulating any restrictions. I did not see any ticket machine or anything that would make me think that I could not park there as a customer of the pub. My fianc!e also did not notice any warning signs. The car park was less than half full.
We went in and had dinner. We left the pub at approximately 18:45 and I was shocked to find a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) from Vehicle Control Services (VCS) on my car. I then noticed (after actively searching for them) that there were some signs up in the car park saying that only permit holders could park there. These signs were not clearly visible or made obvious in any way. I felt like I had been cheated.
I went back into the pub and spoke to the barman in the Exeter Arms. He told me that it was not a PCN issued by the pub and that it was a scam being used by VCS to trick unsuspecting pub customers into paying at least £60 for parking there. He said he had received at least 5 tickets and ignored them all. I also googled ‘Vehicle Control Services’ when I got home and saw that the internet was awash with stories of them issuing inappropriate tickets. There was also a Watchdog episode where they had been investigated.
Since the Court Claim Form was issued, I have since been in touch with the pub landlord and he told me via email, “VCS have sold their debts to a company who have taken a more robust approach. Despite the fact I still believe the original tickets were unlawful due to lack of signage, they have pursued yourself and others. I don’t know what to say. Form a personal point of view it cost me nearly £7,000 !!! Subsequently we don’t rent the space from the landowner any more.”
A non-suspecting customer would have no idea of the issues around who owns the land, who has permits and that VCS are pro-actively issuing PCNs.
It is very unclear how VCS can justify charging £60 for this issue when the car park was half empty at my time of parking there. This amount is now £238.72. Given that all the surrounding buildings are derelict, I do not see how VCS (or whoever they are working for) has lost money as a result of my car being parked in that car park for an hour or so.
In summary:
• The car park looks like any other ‘back of pub’ parking
• The surrounding buildings are all derelict so it is reasonable to assume that the car park is meant purely for the Exeter Arms
• The signs were not clearly visible. Myself and my fianc!e did not see them. They are not lit in any way so it is reasonable to assume that people will not see them, particularly on a cloudy day in low light conditions.
• There is no commercial justification for the amount being claimed."

Cheers

ZESTR

Hi rjr2016, I have a pretty much identical issue to yourself.
My wife and I had lunch at the Exeter Arms in June 2014, parked in the car park only to return to a PCN from VCS.
After searching the area we did find the tiny sign which was way above eye level and very difficult to read.

I then went into the pub and asked them about it and was given the same response to ignore it, which I did along with the numerous letters I received from VCS and then BW Legal.
I then received the County Court claim form last week (27 months after the original "offence"), and plan to have a similar defence to what you have posted above.

Have you heard back from County Court or BW Legal as yet?

Coupon-mad

ZESTR you need to:

1. Read the section 'Small Claim?' in the NEWBIES thread (near the top of this board- no link provided, it's there near the top for a reason, to be read first).

2. acknowledge the claim online as explained in bargepole's post link there in that thread

3. start your own thread for help with the defence you are drafting

4. Oh, and do not reply to any private message from a poster with less than 1000 posts to their name here. We deal with these issues openly on the forum and any pm could be from anyone at all (even the parking firm) and is not recommended to be replied to/read.