Received a Letter Before Claim from Vehicle Control Services - help

Chucky1234

Le_Kirk wrote: »

If you can, go and take a date/time stamped photo. Did the claimant provide any photos of their signage in their evidence pack? Is there a Google street view of the car park?

I can do that, just don't know whether the Claimant would question the validity of it being 2 years after the event. The Claimant provided one copy of the actual signage with a timestamp on from an hour before I parked, and the rest was all stock photos taken, not of the actual signs.

They didn't include the Byelaws sign which is the one they questioned, and you cannot get into the car park from google maps unfortunately.

Le_Kirk

Yes, that is the sort of response one would expect from a claimant! But unless the car park has changed from non-bye-laws to bye-laws it is a fair pointer to the fact that it was bye-laws at the time. Maybe put them to strict proof of the date between your PCN and the date of your photo WHEN the car park changed to become bye-laws.

You could also try searching the forum to see if anyone else has defended a claim at this same car park and ask if they have any photos from nearer the date of your issue.

Chucky1234

UPDATE:

So I have received a 'General Form of Judgement or Order'

It basically states that the case is being adjourned until 21st January 2020 for a three hour hearing and it has not been listed with any other cases.

I have a few queries please;

1: What do I have to send to who and by when do I have to do it? Or where could I find this out?

2: Am I or the Claimant allowed to amend our witness statements, defence or evidence bundles or does it need to be the same as the initial hearing?

3: Presumably when I send in my documents I will have to send it to VCS, is it wise to send a covering letter suggesting I would be willing to accept we both walk away with nothing on a without prejudice basis? Was thinking if they accept then it's good for me, if they refuse then I could use it when I try and argue they have been unreasonable.

Thanks all

Coupon-mad

'General Form of Judgement or Order'

Does that not tell you what the parties are expected to do and by when? If not, then the Judge is satisfied that you must both run with your existing WS & evidence.

However, that does not stop you from putting in a skeleton argument and updated costs schedule a week before, so diarise to pick this up against in the New Year and come and show us what you intend to file & serve as a skeleton argument in order to bring the Consumer Rights Act into it and to ensure your court MUST consider the 'test of fairness' re the signs and sums stated on them, and that £160 can't be claimed for £100 parking charge even if the signs have the £60 on them!

Please read CEC16's thread and bookmark it.

Snakes_Belly

As mentioned my case was also rescheduled. I did get chance to see the first judge for a few minutes and I did give her some more photographs and details of another case. The Claimant's representative pulled a face but the judge accepted them.

Where it may fail is if you are adding another argument to your defence. If you are just enhancing the existing information then they seem OK with it. I found some better photographs which supported my existing defence and a more recent case which supported my existing defence points.

I think that it is a good idea to offer the drop hands. In my second hearing they sent a barrister at £250.00+VAT for the two hours. They are looking at £375.00+VAT for your case because the representative still gets paid for the three hours. Unlikely to send anyone down from Sheffield as it's not cost effective.

The_Deep

I think that it is a good idea to offer the drop hands.

In nearly every case that I see here I would disagree. It seems to me that most of these scammers set out to entrap you.

Their signage is often to high, too wordy, and the print too small. They fail to cancel tickets when reasonably appealed, they use obfuscation, intimidation and misrepresentation , and IMO £100 is ridiculously high.

The more you can cost them the better. We are not here to mitigate the scammers' losses.

Snakes_Belly

The_Deep wrote: »

I think that it is a good idea to offer the drop hands.

In nearly every case that I see here I would disagree. It seems to me that most of these scammers set out to entrap you.

Their signage is often to high, too wordy, and the print too small. They fail to cancel tickets when reasonably appealed, they use obfuscation, intimidation and misrepresentation , and IMO £100 is ridiculously high.

The more you can cost them the better. We are not here to mitigate the scammers' losses.

At the first hearing the OP would have been prepared to 'drop hands' but the Claimant would not. I think that the idea is that at least the defendant has tried to resolve the matter.

Courts are getting so bogged down these days with people taken to court over an altercation about eating an egg on public transport and a cheeky snog on a plane.

Chucky1234

Right everyone my court case is tomorrow, 10am - 2pm. (Un?)fortunately it is the same judge as last time. The plus is that he knows about the £60 scam so that'll mitigate my potential losses, but the negative is he is known to be quite blunt and forthcoming, but he did seem to respect me a little more last time once he could see I half knew what I was talking about.

I haven't done anything since last time except post my Defence, Witness Statement, Skeleton and Evidence to the Claimant around Christmas time, and I am going to go with what I already have.

The taxi case may mean I cannot successfully it should be held in the Mag's, however, I am pretty confident that this does not mean that the land is NOT under statutory control for POFA purposes, so I am going to try and push this as much as possible.

Will update this tomorrow and if anyone has any last minute thoughts I would be grateful to hear them.

KeithP

No mention there about a Costs Schedule.

If you haven't filed one, it would be a good idea to write one and email it to the Claimant tonight and of course take a copy with you to the hearing.

beamerguy

Having the same judge who is aware of VCS and the £60 scam should be in your favour

But, we never know what side of the bed they get out from

good luck