PCN from VCS, Gallagher retail park Scun thorpe

Cerberus1007

I received a pcn from vcs after the driver stopped in a lay-by in Gallagher retail park Scun thorpe near a no stopping sign. I appealed using the template letter in the newbies thread but it was rejected. I know the forum advises ignoring all further contact other than court papers, but if it went to court how would I defend myself? I've yet to complain to the landowner as I don't know who it is. I'd appreciate any advice.

Redx

no contract
grace periods
not the same as BEAVIS

etc

waamo

Court cases tend to be won on legal grounds not what is right or wrong. Whilst they might have you "bang to rights" VCS often fail on points like landowner authority, signage size, lack of POFA compliance and many others.

As you are at a very early stage with plenty of time before anything happens why not read the court guide in the Newbies thread in preparation. You may well get nowhere near the inside of a court room don't forget. VCS don't take everyone to court.

DoaM

VCS don't even try to use POFA to transfer liability to the keeper ... they still try to use Elliot v Loake to assume the keeper was the driver. I'm not aware of ANY court case they've won on this basis.

Cerberus1007

Vcs have referenced pofa in their appeal rejection letter saying they may pursue me as the registered keeper.

Lamilad

Cerberus1007 wrote: »

Vcs have referenced pofa in their appeal rejection letter saying they may pursue me as the registered keeper.

VCS/Excel NTKs are now PoFA compliant, have been for several months, (provided they can issue them in time).

If the alleged contravention occurred recently then chances are you've received a compliant NTK and can be held liable as the RK.

There's plenty of other reasons why this is defendable in court -
* No locus standi
* Inadequate signage
* Forbidding signage (possibly)
* CoP failures
* Grace periods
* Frustration of contract
Etc etc

And if the geniuses at BW Legal get involved with any future court case (as they usually do) then you can add CPR failures, inadequate PoC and loads of other procedural !!!! ups to that list as well.

Cerberus1007

As vcs have provided evidence of a parking event of less than a minute I complained to the ipc asking if this was a reasonable grace period. Here is their response:


Dear Mr

We have now had the opportunity to discuss your complaint with the operator, who has confirmed that the Parking Charge Notice was issued, as the vehicle was observed parked within an area where signage clearly informs any motorist that the area is a 'No Stopping' Area.

Our Code of Practice states the following:

15.1 The driver should be allowed sufficient time to park and read the signs and make an informed decision

15.2 Drivers must be allowed 10 minutes to leave a site after a prepaid period of parking.

15.3 Reference to the above shall not apply where the prepaid period of parking does not exceed 1 hour.

I can confirm that as this area is a no stopping area, then the grace period does not apply, therefore I have been unable locate a breach of our Code of Practice.

Sorry I cannot assist you further with this matter.

Kind Regards
The IPC


I double checked their code of practice only to find that 15.3 does not exist (nor would it even be relevant if it did) and they pulled it completely out their backside. Is it worth complaining about this to anyone, maybe the dvla?

Coupon-mad

15.3 ''Reference to the above shall not apply where the prepaid period of parking does not exceed 1 hour'' does not exist

Yes it does, I've seen it.

KeithP

Yes, 15.3 does exist.

But they are rather economical with the truth...

Here it is (on page 13) in its entirety:

15.3 The reference to 10 minutes in 15.2 above shall not apply where the period of pre-paid or permitted parking does not exceed 1 hour providing that the signage on the site makes it clear to the motorist, in a prominent font, that no grace period applies on that land.

So was there prominent signage making it clear that there is no grace period?
I suspect not.

Cerberus1007

Strange, when I open the code of practice 15.3 doesn't come up. Anyway as this is not after a period of prepaid or permitted parking 15.2 and 15.3 don't apply and 15.1 stands on its own? In any case surely I'm entitled to some time to read the terms and conditions regardless of what the ipc say?

KeithP

Cerberus1007 wrote: »

Strange, when I open the code of practice 15.3 doesn't come up.

You were reading an older version.

Why the IPC still host an older version is beyond me.
It can only be to confuse the motorist.