VCS old claims (2015)

Snakes_Belly

To all that are defending claims from VCS from circa 2015 there could be a Switcheroo going on.
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2014/12/excel-parking-services-ltd-try-one-two.html
This occurred around about this time. The car parks were Excel and claims were from VCS. These companies are owned by the same directors but are legally separate entities. .

Prankster says

Either the landowner has a contract with Excel, in which case the notice to keeper is not valid as it arrives from a company who does not have the right to manage the car park. Or the landowner has a contract with VCS, in which case, VCS does not have a contract with the motorist because their name is not on the signage.

I have a strong suspicion that there is at least one current case where this is happening as I have fought a case relating to the car park in question.

When the SARs are received it will be interesting to see the signage. It will need to be studied carefully.

Umkomaas

When the SARs are received it will be interesting to see the signage. It will need to be studied carefully.

SARs won't elicit signage. Personal data only.

You might get signage as part of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (PaP)/Letter of Claim process, but highly unlikely via a SAR.

bargepole

Snakes_Belly wrote: »

.. The car parks were Excel and claims were from VCS. These companies are owned by the same directors but are legally separate entities. .

It doesn't really matter who the landowner contracted with, or what information is provided in response to the SAR. It's a matter of contract (or lack of) between the PPC and the motorist. Here is the argument that should be used:

The Claim is made in the name of Vehicle Control Services Ltd. (Company No. 04298820), whereas the signage displayed at the location in question was, and is, in the name of Excel Parking Services Ltd. (Company No. 02878122), a separate legal entity. This fact can be confirmed by reference to the images contained in the Claimant’s bundle. Any contract, in a private car park, can only be formed by signage, and it is therefore submitted that if there was any contract, it would have been between Excel and the Defendant. VCS were not a party to such a contract, and therefore cannot sue on it.

Snakes_Belly

Umkomaas wrote: »

SARs won't elicit signage. Personal data only.

You might get signage as part of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (PaP)/Letter of Claim process, but highly unlikely via a SAR.

The problem with some of these 2015 claims is that the posters can't remember exactly where they were parked. In the case that I have suspicions about there were multiple operators in this area, (railway operator, Lidl car park, and Excel). The SAR hopefully should give an idea.

Snakes_Belly

bargepole wrote: »

It doesn't really matter who the landowner contracted with, or what information is provided in response to the SAR. It's a matter of contract (or lack of) between the PPC and the motorist. Here is the argument that should be used:

The Claim is made in the name of Vehicle Control Services Ltd. (Company No. 04298820), whereas the signage displayed at the location in question was, and is, in the name of Excel Parking Services Ltd. (Company No. 02878122), a separate legal entity. This fact can be confirmed by reference to the images contained in the Claimant’s bundle. Any contract, in a private car park, can only be formed by signage, and it is therefore submitted that if there was any contract, it would have been between Excel and the Defendant. VCS were not a party to such a contract, and therefore cannot sue on it.

Thank you Bargepole. I think that this will be very useful for posters who have received claims from VCS dating back to 2015.

The_Deep

I think that every one of these cases should be brought to the attention of one's MP, the ATA, DVLA, and Trading Standards.

Although nothing unlawful there may be going on there may be a legal loophole which we can exploit.

Snakes_Belly

The_Deep wrote: »

I think that every one of these cases should be brought to the attention of one's MP, the ATA, DVLA, and Trading Standards.

Although nothing unlawful there may be going on there may be a legal loophole which we can exploit.

It's not like a written contract where people have a record. Posters are having to try to remember who was driving and where they were parked. So wrong on every level to start resurrecting these old claims.

Egbert_Nobacon

As VCS and Excel are separate entities should they be sharing personal data ?