VCS Small Claims Court - Parking in a 'restricted' area

keep_calm_and_carry_on

Ok, the unabridged version:



I got to court about 10 minutes before the hearing. The VCS rep was already there and immediately told me that we needed to have a discussion. He asked me if I wanted to settle the case, obviously I said no. He then said “you’ve said you weren’t driving?” I said yeah, I didn’t know who was driving because it was over 3 years ago. I was suspicious at this point and he was being quite pushy. He then said “you’ve said that other people could have used the car – are you going to produce insurance documents to show that, because that would be ambushing and that’s not allowed” I said no, I wasn’t going to do that and we best wait until we’re in the court to discuss further.



The court was running on time which was a nice surprise as I’d waited hours previously.



VCS rep tried to delay going in as he couldn’t get onto his server or something to download documents but the judge said he had to come in.



I think the judge started by explaining to me that my previous case (with excel parking) and this one with VCS weren’t linked and it wasn’t a personal vendetta against me, and that these companies have so many claims they would really struggle to link them together. I think she thought I had some form of parking company big brother type paranoia (marginally true, but I’d accepted these are separate claims – this wasn’t apparent when I’d written my first defence).



Then she went on to talk about the letter that DJ MacCuish had issued after the hearing I’d had back in October. She read out the additional conditions that had been set on VCS in the letter, and the paragraph that stated that these conditions must be answered in VCS’s witness statement. She then looked through the witness statement, explaining that there was no attempt to answer the additional conditions. She then said that the claim was struck out on that basis. I was a happy camper by this point.



She then said that the only issue left to discuss was cost and started mentioning the £95 per hearing rule or whatever it is. I then asked if she had received a copy of my skeleton argument and cost schedule. Mr VCS said that he had not received it and therefore it couldn’t be used as it broke practise direction ???. The judge told him off at this point as she said that was her decision to make, and asked me when I had submitted it. I had emailed it to VCS 2 day prior to the hearing, and hand delivered it to the court the day before – this is in time for it to be considered. Mr VCS tried to dispute I’d sent it. I thought I’d printed off the email to prove that I had, so I said I had proof and started to go through my documents – I hadn’t got a copy. I was panicking a bit at this point in case the Judge was going to say no to me.



The judge said that she was satisfied that I’d delivered it to court in time and therefore it was allowed.



She then explained to me that because my case had been struck out, in the eyes of the court it no longer existed. This meant she had not assessed the case and had not made a judgement was to whether the claim was valid or not. My previous case had been dismissed and therefore I could claim costs as the judge had found in my favour.



This meant that if I wanted to pursue costs, I opened up the opportunity for VCS to appeal the case and then take it back to trial again. She asked if I wanted to go for costs despite this. I said yes (figuring that I had a solid case against VCS regardless and I would welcome the opportunity to prove it!).



I had written a skeleton argument to back up my cost schedule. I was arguing that VCS’s behaviour had been ‘unreasonable’ (Civil Practice Rule Part 38.5(3) and Civil Practice Rule Part 27.14(2)(g)) and I was therefore entitled to costs above what is normally allowed in the small claims court. I was also arguing for financial loss as I’m self employed.



I think she then asked me why I thought VCS’s behaviour had been unreasonable. I can’t remember what I said but I was confused by this point. At the end of whatever I said I asked her if I’d answered her question. She said no, and repeated it again. I then cottoned on and read out the first part of my skeleton which focussed on VCS failing to assess their own evidence to ensure their case could succeed. I said they had been unreasonable as they had a)issued a PCN to my car when it wasn’t in their car park, b) had sent many threatening letters to me asking for money when they weren’t entitled to, c) had started a case without examining the evidence which showed I wasn’t in their car park, d) had continued with the case and had produced evidence my car wasn’t in their car park as part of their witness statement.



I’d written more things about not turning up at the court on time / the reps being unprepared / not complying with the additional conditions but I didn’t read that bit out. I probably should have.



Anyway, the judge then said that VCS should have had the information available at the first hearing. She also said they hadn’t complied with the conditions and that they could not prove their case. She asked the Rep if he had a response – he just said sorry!



She then went on to say that VCS had been unreasonable, that they had failed to provide evidence twice, had not provided information so they could be adequately represented, failed to comply with the additional conditions and that they had been warned that costs for the first hearing would roll to the second.



Then she asked me to explain how I’d come up with my costs for researching the case. I explained that I’m self employed on an hourly rate and that I’d had to take time off my day job to research and write documents, backed up by my invoices which showed I’d worked less hours prior to the hearings etc.



She then explained that she had to use the rate as if I’d employed a legally trained professional. She accepted that it would have taken me longer to do the research and therefore 4 hours per hearing was reasonable.



I got a bit lost at this point and was struggling to write down what she was saying. She went through the costs on a line by line basis, allowing me postage and parking. Anyway, she totalled it up at the end and it came to £511.60 and she told VCS that needed to be paid within 14 days.



She then addressed Mr VCS and said that it was the second time in a week that she’d awarded costs for unreasonable behaviour against a parking firm and that he should make the company aware of that. She also said that this kind of thing was a waste of my, the rep’s and the court’s time.



We then left – the rep asked me if I’d considered a career change to the law!!! Made me laugh. We then had a bit of a chat about it and both agreed it was a complete shambles. He then told me that he needed to phone it in and that he would be getting a roasting for the result!!! He complained about the quality of the documents he’d received off VCS – he’d got some really bad black and white photocopies.



The whole thing was over and done within 35 minutes! I was in total shock.

Anyway, hopefully that concludes my dealings with the receiving end of the small claims court – I can’t say I’ve enjoyed it but I am looking forward to cashing the cheque from VCS. I’m hoping to spend it on a week in Tenerife!!! I’ll be sure to send VCS a postcard.

Anyone reading this who is going through the same pain – you CAN do it! I am happy to share any of the docs I prepared – send me a message.

beamerguy

Great report

Must bring tears to the eyes of Renshaw-Smith :rotfl:

VCS/Excel will constantly have this problem with the courts and they will never know when it will happen next with their dodgy claims

I think that UNREASONABLE is much the same as Abuse of Process so, you are now in post # 1 of the Abuse of process thread..

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6014081/abuse-of-process-district-judge-tells-bwlegal

Snakes_Belly

Great report Keep Calm. Enjoy your holiday.

keep_calm_and_carry_on

Have I won the prize for the biggest costs awarded to date then?!?

beamerguy

keep_calm_and_carry_on wrote: »

Have I won the prize for the biggest costs awarded to date then?!?

Maybe but the goal to reach is £1500

That was awarded to Mr Boden against Parking Eye

Don't despair, he was a barrister ..... well above a judge

But, you did very well and we hope you can help others on here

Umkomaas

Super report. I can almost smell the blood dripping!

I am looking forward to cashing the cheque from VCS. I’m hoping to spend it on a week in Tenerife!!! I’ll be sure to send VCS a postcard.

If you're there at the right time you'll be able to hand it personally to Renshaw-Smith - he'll be the one on the biggest yacht in the harbour!

beamerguy

Umkomaas wrote: »

If you're there at the right time you'll be able to hand it personally to Renshaw-Smith - he'll be the one on the biggest yacht in the harbour!

I did hear that he had downgraded to a barge on the Grand Union Canal, something to do with delving in murky waters

Castle

beamerguy wrote: »

I did hear that he had downgraded to a barge on the Grand Union Canal, something to do with delving in murky waters

Maybe a Dredger would be more appropriate!

keep_calm_and_carry_on

beamerguy wrote: »

Maybe but the goal to reach is £1500

That was awarded to Mr Boden against Parking Eye

Don't despair, he was a barrister ..... well above a judge

Haha well its good to know I'm towards the top!

And if I can do it, then anyone can. I've got no legal background or experience. This win is down to the information from this forum and you excellent people.

beamerguy

keep_calm_and_carry_on wrote: »

Haha well its good to know I'm towards the top!

And if I can do it, then anyone can. I've got no legal background or experience. This win is down to the information from this forum and you excellent people.

You certainly are and don't do yourself down, the brilliant people on this forum helped but you grasped it all and went forth to spank these unworthy critters

Renshaw-smith will be working out how he can stop people like you and this forum. HE CANNOT whilst he continues to scam people
It might take a few more years for it to sink in with him and we will all enjoy the spankings as and when they happen

Ignorance as they say is bliss