Another Letter

FTJEB

I have now received a second letter from VCS stating that they are proceeding on the reasonable assumption that the keeper was the driver.


I have to either pay up or appeal to IAS.


They are also requesting that I complete a Subject Access Request Form and PAY & £10 fee!


Am I correct to assume that the advice is to just ignore?


Thanks

Redx

yes, they did not tell you the last option which you deduced

please read the NEWBIES sticky thread , it explains more

beamerguy

FTJEB wrote: »

I have now received a second letter from VCS stating that they are proceeding on the reasonable assumption that the keeper was the driver.


I have to either pay up or appeal to IAS.


They are also requesting that I complete a Subject Access Request Form and PAY & £10 fee!


Am I correct to assume that the advice is to just ignore?


Thanks

VCS can assume all they want but they still don't know who
the driver is ....

As you will have read, the IAS is just a sham operated by
the infamous Gladstones boys

Why would they want you to complete a Subject Access Request

FTJEB

Good afternoon,


'Notice of Intended Court Proceedings' letter received stating that VCS 'may commence legal proceedings' if I don't pay the fee by a certain date.


Advice would be appreciated.


Do I continue to ignore until court proceedings are issued and then prepare a defence?


Thanks

beamerguy

FTJEB wrote: »

Good afternoon,


'Notice of Intended Court Proceedings' letter received stating that VCS 'may commence legal proceedings' if I don't pay the fee by a certain date.


Advice would be appreciated.


Do I continue to ignore until court proceedings are issued and then prepare a defence?


Thanks

You just wait now, if real court papers arrive come back here
They will probably come from BWLegal who are incompetent
legals used by VCS and are often zapped in court by a judge

Coupon-mad

FTJEB wrote: »

Good afternoon,


'Notice of Intended Court Proceedings' letter received stating that VCS 'may commence legal proceedings' if I don't pay the fee by a certain date.


Advice would be appreciated.


Do I continue to ignore until court proceedings are issued and then prepare a defence?


Thanks

Or you could write a version of a reply to an LBCCC, as shown in the NEWBIES thread. I favour the long and legalese complaint ones, penned by Johnersh and LoadsofChildren123.

The_Deep

If they are relying on Elliot v Loake they will struggle

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/excel-v-ms-x-c8dp5c7t.html

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/excel-lose-at-sheffield-elliot-v-loake.html

https://www.google.co.uk/search?site=&source=hp&q=prankster+elliot+v+loake&oq=prankster+elliot+v+loake&gs_l=psy-ab.3...2562.16970.0.21204.24.24.0.0.0.0.265.3087.3j19j2.24.0....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..0.19.2501...0j0i131k1j0i22i30k1j33i160k1j33i21k1.Lu8f5LZBn6k

FTJEB

They are relying on ParkingEye v Beavis

beamerguy

FTJEB wrote: »

They are relying on ParkingEye v Beavis

That is so old news now, if thats all they have to rely on, must show they are on a losing streak

Barry Beavis went to the Supreme Court claiming the charges
were unfair. The court said they were ok

Is this your case ??? if not VCS are barking up the wrong tree

And as they have not mentioned Elliot v Loake, (which they have
already been whooped in court about) .... seems like their armour
is rusting away

Coupon-mad

FTJEB wrote: »

They are relying on ParkingEye v Beavis

Well yeah, they all try that. Send a response to LBCCC as per the NEWBIES thread, as already advised.

Umkomaas

Beavis, M'Lud, innit?