Ticket From VCS Brookshaw Sheffield

Coupon-mad

where has this been stated about the DVLA ageeing the NTD is not acually a NTD in respect of POFA when VCS are relying on it. Can you remember where it was, I've searched and can't find anything.

The DVLA believed the IPC ''this is not a NTD'' and stuck their fingers in their ears 18 months ago:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5589636/not-your-usual-pcn-excel-parking

HTH

RobinofLoxley

Coupon-mad wrote: »

The DVLA believed the IPC ''this is not a NTD'' and stuck their fingers in their ears 18 months ago:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5589636/not-your-usual-pcn-excel-parking

HTH

Thanks for that CM.

It's strange but not surprising that the DVLA take advice from the IPC but I think that means nothing.

The real test would be in a court and as I said i'm fairly sure a judge would come to the same conclusion as us and any sensible person that this notice is indeed a 'Notice to Driver'.

RichieBoy56

Claim Form received from CC Business Centre. Brief description of claim with detailed particulars to follow in 14 days. I take that I wait for these before submitting my defence?
I have submitted my acknowledgement of claim online to Defend All.


Do you think that I should put in a SAR request? I was thinking of requesting all information relating to this claim but requesting all and any information that they hold would create more work for them.


Your valued opinions would be appreciated.

System

Who signed the Claim Form? Is it Jake or Simon?

Castle

RichieBoy56 wrote: »

Do you think that I should put in a SAR request? I was thinking of requesting all information relating to this claim but requesting all and any information that they hold would create more work for them.

Yes you should and it will be interesting to see if they list the companies your data have been shared with because "myparkigcharge.co.uk" is actually operated by Excel Parking, (a different company).

RichieBoy56

Signed by Simon. Is this bad?

Coupon-mad

Not at all, makes no odds, why not search Simon Renshaw Smith defence on this forum to find other threads where a defence has already been prepared, to crib from?

RichieBoy56

Particulars of claim below:

'The Claimant is a national car park operator that provides car park management on behalf of
its Clients at a number of car parks across Great Britain. This includes monitoring compliance with the Terms and Conditions of parking outlined within the signage present on each site and issuing Charges to motorists who breach these Terms and Conditions.
The Claimant manages a parking scheme and regularly inspects the development in accordance with their appointment. The Claimants' role is to erect signs within the development explaining the Terms and Conditions associated with parking in order to regulate parking. Any vehicles identified in breach of the Terms and Conditions will be issued with a Charge Notice.

The Defendant has been issued with a Charge Notice relating to a xxxxxxxxxx bearing thevehicle registration number(s) of xxxxxx, for failure to adhere to the advertised Terms and Conditions at a development(s) known as Brookshaw Retail Park Customer Car Park, Sheffield, S3 8RW Development'] on the xxxxxx 2017. The offer advertised by way of the Terms and Conditions was accepted by conduct. As reiterated a Charge Notice was issued by the Claimant which allowed the Defendant the opportunity to either pay, appeal or transfer liability. The Claimant issued this claim against the Defendant for payment of unpaid Charges, in thesum claimed of £160.00, arising from the above vehicle as to which the Defendant isresponsible for either as the driver and/or the registered keeper of the vehicle on the materialdate and time. For the avoidance of doubt, the sum claimed includes the £100.00 ChargeNotice plus a debt collection charge of £60.00. The cause of action is a breach of contract for failing to adhere to the Terms and Conditions of entering private land. The Terms and Conditions are displayed in prominent locations around the development and ought to have been known by any motorists or to an objective observer who would consider that someone has had the opportunity to have read the prominent terms but have chosen not to read them. The Claimant is also entitled to claim statutory interest at the rate of 8% pursuant to s69 of the County Courts Act 1984 and Fixed Costs pursuant to CPR 27.14. This includes the fixed costs payable under Part 45, namely the appropriate court fee or fees paid by the Claimant.Despite demand having been made, the Defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability. The Claimant had no alternative other than to bring an action against the Defendant and seek a final determination by bringing legal proceedings against the Defendant.'

I will be drafting my Defence over the next few days and any comments on the above particulars would be appreciated. It seems very generic to me, and lacking in detail.
The main thrust of my defence is that I was not the driver and will provide a witness to state this.

Coupon-mad

any comments on the above particulars would be appreciated. It seems very generic to me, and lacking in detail.

Yes indeed.

plus a debt collection charge of £60.00.

Did not exist - they make that up, and the ParkingEye v Beavis Supreme Court case confirms that the parking charge itself (£100 in this case of yours) already more than comfortably covers all administration costs of an automated parking ticket regime, and is almost entirely pure profit, so a PPC cannot add more on top and claim it is 'damages' or fake 'debt collection fees'.

Neither actually exist. No fee is paid to a debt collector; they operate on a 'no win no fee' basis.

That's double recovery, not allowed in small claims. And the POFA Sch4 says that the sum that can be recovered is capped at the sum on a compliant NTK, no more, and no double recovery allowed.

RichieBoy56

Should I send a CPR 31.14 request to VCS for additional information?