Advice needed on Defence already submitted- going forward to contest VCS

gumgirl

ok thanks, will do.

gumgirl

Many thanks to all on the forum who have helped me on my WS. I am sending it off very soon today and I will let you know the outcome. Gina

Le_Kirk

Sending it? Are you not delivering it personally to the court with your evidence and cost schedule? Posting/e-mail to the claimant is fine. If you do post to anyone don't forget to get a free certificate of posting and keep it safe.

gumgirl

Sorry, yes taking the WS to court today and posting to VCS, making sure to get receipt of posting. I read on here that VCS won’t accept email. Gina

Le_Kirk

gumgirl wrote: »

Sorry, yes taking the WS to court today and posting to VCS, making sure to get receipt of posting. I read on here that VCS won’t accept email. Gina

Superb - just the job.

gumgirl

Hi Everyone,

Just to let people know I won my case today against VCS for allegedly overstaying at Berkeley Precinct in Sheffield in 2015.

The summary of my main arguments against VCS is below: (Full witness statement on another thread) :

a. The actions of the Claimant to (a) offer a contract in the form of a sign, (b) establish a parking charge, and (c) to claim against the registered keeper; are in breach of procedures mandated by;

i. The Parking Trade Association for which it is affiliated.
ii. The Act for which the claimant relies on.

b. A contract was not in place with the driver or the defendant who is the registered keeper. Therefore, no breach of contract has ever occurred. They have the ability prescribed by law (POFA 2012) to transfer the liability for the parking charge to the keeper if they do not know the name of the driver. As VCS have chosen not to use that right under POFA the keeper cannot be held liable.

c. Inadequate and illegible signage.

d. The sum of the claim brought forward includes £100 of a Parking Charge and an additional £60 for ‘debt recovery costs’ as previously indicated by the Claimant. The additional £60 is an attempt of double recovery and is unreasonable and extravagant.

The judge dismissed a and b: because I had been served notice of the parking ticket within 14 days. He also dismissed an argument that- though a copy of the contract with the landowner provided by VCS in their Witness Statement was out of date -it was recognised to be a rolling contract.

The case was won on C- signage. The judge ruled that the evidence provided by VCS on signage in their Witness Statement did not appear to match my photographs taken at the site, just after the alleged incident in 2015, showing signage was inadequate, hard to read, high up etc. My later photos taken in 2019 as evidence for my Witness Statement, which showed photos of the signs in the evening, in unlit conditions, with broken street lamps was accepted as further evidence by the judge that my account of the signs could not be contradicted by VCS, as their legal representative did not have first hand knowledge of the site. Further, as the car park has erected new signs since 2015, as the site changed from being free for 2 hours to being free for one hour then becoming paid, I pointed out the new signs had bigger font and were now illuminated. I also said VCS photocopies of the signs
were not taken in real life conditions, they were merely stock images and the judge accepted they could not be used to corroborate VCS’ s claims that there were more than one type of sign at the site in 2015.

Costs were awarded to me of just over £100 as the judge would not accept my argument that I should be given costs in lieu of researching the case.- but gave me the maximum £95 one day allowance for a day off work to attend court- plus photocopying and parking fees incurred by me to attend the hearing.

I asked the judge, if I had not won the case on signage, would he be minded to allow the extra £60 VCS were claiming for debt recovery charges, on top of the £100 they were also claiming. He said he would not be minded to have allowed that as VCS would be unable to give a breakdown of the extra costs. (I was taking notes but things happened quickly so this is all to the best of my recall!)

I thought he was very fair as a judge overall. I also asked the judge and the VCS representative if they were aware of the new Parking Bill having just recently got assent and which may curb the excesses of companies such as VCS. Both were not aware but the judge offered an opinion that the parking companies would most likely try and find new loopholes.

If it helps anyone in a similar situation. I took the advice of posters on this forum to ensure my documentation was thorough, and I think it went in my favour I had prepared carefully, taking further photos to counteract their generic witness statement and dissecting their argument. Luckily I got their WS before I sent mine to them. (I got good advice on the forum to submit mine at the last minute.)

So, after wondering whether I should just have paid up initially, I am now very pleased I kept with it and am very grateful to all the advice given on the forum by various posters. The court appearance was not as daunting as I thought, so all in all, another win against the parking companies!!

Many thanks.
GIna

beamerguy

Well done gumgirl, VCS spanked again is superb news

I also asked the judge and the VCS representative if they were aware of the new Parking Bill having just recently got assent and which may curb the excesses of companies such as VCS. Both were not aware but the judge offered an opinion that the parking companies would most likely try and find new loopholes.

That's a worry, if the judge does not know

Good result though, maybe if you have time, you can help others

Guess "simple simon" will find loopholes but nothing we cannot beat him again and again

gumgirl

Thanks! Yes I was surprised that the judge did not know. And I am happy to offer help if relevant to others with my limited experience, I will check back on the forums from time to time when I can.

Coupon-mad

Yay, well done to you, Gina! ANOTHER VCS ONE BITES THE DUST!

:T

gumgirl

I must admit to being chuffed and it’s great they had to fork out for legals etc! Gina.