Liverpool business park PCN - We won!

Tinyteague

Hi,

Just looking for a bit of advice please, I have received a PCN (NTK) for a no stopping contravention at the above site. Although the back story probably is not important, the driver accidentally found themselves driving down this road and had to turn in a off-road, which is where they got photographed for 34 seconds.

I have read the newbies section, and appealed online using the template letter and not identifying the driver. They responded with an appeal reply (email) saying they cannot ascertain the driver and require either the drivers name or a statement stating I represent the driver.

From the newbies section, it would appear the creditor (VCS) uses IAS. So just to clarify, do I now ignore this appeal reply and not bother appealing to IAS?

Thanks.

Redx

you are 100% correct

Coupon-mad

Yep and read any other threads you find by searching the forum for:

VCS stopping defence

...because they have sued people and there are defences you need to read.

Tinyteague

Hi,

The LBC arrived in the mail. Randomly sporting a hybrid address (our address but with our previous addresses postcode).

Just want to clarify that my next step is to send a SAR to VCS?

As for picking through the LBC to compare against the pre-action protocol, I just keep that information handy for later use?

Thanks.

Redx

does the LBC have 30 days notice to reply and the financial forms ?

if so, send a rebuttal

and yes send the SAR to their DPO asap too

also tell that DPO to do a DATA RECTIFICATION and to amend your postcode etc to the correct one that you supply with this SAR

IE:- its a data rectification notice


also read this thread too


https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5934589

Tinyteague

Hi,

Ive sent the SAR and the data rectification to the DPO.

Just wondering the letter I need to send to VCS telling them i've sent the SAR does that need to be anything more than a 1 line formal letter stating such?

Also do you have any pointers on the rebuttal?

Thanks again

Tinyteague

Hi,

Sorry for the long post.

I’ve sent a letter to VCS’ litigation department pointing out that a SAR was sent to their DPO in data protection department. Both of these were sent by email which I’m hoping is ok.

As for the rebuttal, can this also be sent as an email, or is this one where a postage with proof of postage is required?

It would appear that they had our correct address, as all previous correspondence (including the NTK) used the correct address, yet the LBC used a weird hybrid address (the reason for the data rectification), were they trying to pull a fast one and hoping it would never arrive?

My plan for the rebuttal is to raise the following points:

I plan on denying the charge, then asking for all documentation and evidence that the keeper was in breach of a contract (or should this be left out because these documents were requested via SAR?).

The driver was never identified, however I am unsure whether they failed to meet POFA requirements to pursue me as keeper. But if I can find any reason why they weren’t POFA compliant here, I’ll be raising this point.

The LBC appears to be compliant with ‘pre action protocol for debt claims’. So don’t think I have anything to add from that.

I’ve read through POFA 2012, and it looks like they drafted their entire NTK by making their way down the points in para 9 section 2. The only discrepancies I can find, is the “current address for service” (but it arrived anyway, so perhaps moot), the fact that this is a no stopping contravention and not a parking contravention (do they use these terms interchangeably?) and the contravention time which is stated as a time of day and not a period as stated in para 9, section 2, a. (“period of parking to which the notice relates”).

I intend to ask if they intend on suing me on the grounds of trespass, or as a contractual charge (par 2, 1. A. and b.). If its the latter, (which I assume it is, as their NTK talks about a parking charge) I need to ask if they have the land owners authority to enter a contract with the keeper (POFA “relevant contract”).

From what I’ve read, the signs would be an offer to treat, and as an offeree I would be accepting the terms by performance, but the paradox is, to see if I want to accept the terms, I have to stop to read the bloody sign! I don't think anybody travelling at the speed limit passed those signs could read them.

Ask for this contract in writing, (I assume this counts as a written contract?) as allowed from the pre-action protocol for debt claims (para 3.1 a) iv.).

Question the additional £60 that appeared on the principle debt dressed up as a ‘dept collection charge’. Im unsure where I’ve read this is not allowed? I read that DVLA’s KADOE forbids selling debt, but this is VCS throwing on the charge.

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Redx

email is fine if they allow it and have an email for their litigation dept, send a copy to yourself in the TO box, to prove it was sent and received ok (in your case) and wasnt subject to a P O DELIVERY FAILURE NOTICE from them (so it must have arrived)


if in doubt, post one with free proof of posting from the P O Counter

Tinyteague

Thanks, I'll most likely post with free proof then.

Could anyone answer the questions I had, I'll list them here as what I posted was a wall of text:

Should I ask for all documents, evidence of 'parking' and the contract in the rebuttal despite asking for it in the SAR?

Their LBC seems to comply to the pre action protocol. Am I being naive, because I've read that most are not (I realise the protocol has to be followed after the LBC and their response(/lack of) could stumble them)?

Is a no stopping violation POFA compliant? All I see is references to parking, and stopping and parking are different.

Should I inform them that the NTK was not POFA compliant and leave it at that, or tell them why it wasnt?

What forbids them for adding an additional 'debt collection charge'?

Greatly appreciating the feedback.

Redx

yes, ask for all docs, all pictures, signage , map of the area including boundaries and sign placement, landowner contract etc


I wouldnt worry yoo much about the PaP, if the LBC has what you asked for (within reason) and there are no glaring issues , then treat it as a game of letetr tennis and nothing more


if the vehicle is stationary, its likely to be "parked", but as this was on a private road and because they sent a parking charge notice, they are using "parking" for road enforcement, which is a grey area


just allege its not compliant by rebutting it, it is for them to prove that it was, or fail that test, leave your proving it (or rebutting their assertion) for court


YOU do, by complaining about any additional costs that are an abuse of process, so no adding on unwarranted costs, no double recovery, no additional charges that should not be there, this is after all, the SMALL CLAIMS COURT, not some million pound fraud case

Umkomaas

Should I ask for all documents, evidence of 'parking' and the contract in the rebuttal despite asking for it in the SAR?

You're entitled to them, so why not? You should get identical bundles - if you don't, then there's a potential chink in their position that might be exploitable.

Their LBC seems to comply to the pre action protocol. Am I being naive, because I've read that most are not (I realise the protocol has to be followed after the LBC and their response(/lack of) could stumble them)?

They're getting better at these, as the PaP is now over 12 months since introduction. It's hardly ever been a showstopper, so if you think it's broadly compliant, I'd concentrate on other potentially more viable areas.

Is a no stopping violation POFA compliant? All I see is references to parking, and stopping and parking are different.

PoFA is only relevant in relation to holding a keeper liable for unpaid parking charges on behalf of the driver. So the question 'Is a no stopping violation PoFA compliant' doesn't have an answer. PoFA is only a potential silver bullet for keeper liability.

Whether 'stopping' is a contractual breach (signage all-important) and whether a PPC should be allowed to access keeper details from the DVLA under their KADOE contract is a much different set of questions. A Judge would be the only one to determine the former, the DVLA would determine the latter (don't hold your breath).

Should I inform them that the NTK was not POFA compliant and leave it at that, or tell them why it wasnt?

No matter what you put at this stage, you're going nowhere (other than to show a Judge in due course - if it gets that far - that you have engaged in trying to resolve this).

What forbids them for adding an additional 'debt collection charge'?

They can 'add' whatever they want. It's whether you are going to pay it is the critical question. Remember, it is only a Judge who can tell you to pay any amount to a PPC. Most Judges have seen through the added extras, which the PPC can no way justify, nor show evidence that the extras have been paid by them as disbursements.

But as with everything going through court, you have to be on top of everything (via well argued objection) otherwise the court can take it that no objection can be construed as acceptance.

Most Judges will help inexperienced litigants-in-person, but things can sometimes not go to plan, especially if you pull a freshly spanked and brandied up old chuffer!