Double Claim Forms from VCS

KeithP

Thanks BrownTrout. Yes I have seen that mentioned before but I don't feel able to describe how it might be done in a way that is easy for people to understand. Can you possibly suggest how it might be written to be easily understood?

BrownTrout

So save document as a pdf
Upload to something like pdfscape
Create signature. Apply to the right place . Date document Save download and email

Or something like that

Redx

I believe you can also sign and date a pice of paper and scan it or take a picture of it, then add the picture to the completed defence pdf, as a digital signature - google digital signature

BrownTrout

The reason i mention sign on pdf is a lot less people have printers at home now and many would not want to print stuff at work amd pdfscape is really easy to use

[Deleted User]

A subject access request will occasionally be kicked into the long grass. The advantage with a CPR18 request is that it becomes part of the pleaded case.

However, reminding myself of the unique rules of the small claims track (CPR23) this isn't in fact an option, so an SAR is your best course.

Sorry for the confusion!

ThatJoeSoap

Having done the AOS and submitted the defence both as advised to ccbcaq.justice.gov.uk and received email receipts my wife has just opened a letter stating she has not responded to the claim and has to now pay the full amount to the claimant?????

Can anyone explain this and advise how to remedy it?

KeithP

ThatJoeSoap wrote: »

Having done the AOS and submitted the defence both as advised to ccbcaq.justice.gov.uk and received email receipts my wife has just opened a letter stating she has not responded to the claim and has to now pay the full amount to the claimant?????

Can anyone explain this and advise how to remedy it?

It is difficult to know what to suggest without knowing who sent that letter.

nosferatu1001

MCOL - does it show your defence on there?
I presume the letter was from teh court, saying judgement in default? What DATE is given on it?

WHen EXACTLY was the defence submitted? Did you check on MCOL that your defence was showing on file?

ThatJoeSoap

The letter is from the County Court Business Centre dated the 24th July stating my wife has not replied to the claim form. We take this to mean they haven’t received either the AOS or the Defence or both but we have email receipts for each email.

I have also checked with the helpline and the AOS on my own case (same car different date) and it is registered, I used exactly the same online form sent to the same address.

I couldn’t get onto the MCOL system from the outset using the previous logon I had from a couple of years ago, when I called the helpline they said I didn’t need to and could send all correspondence via the CCBCAQ web address which is what was done.

My wife has called the helpline and has been told to resend the emails and receipts to a bulkcentre.helpdesk@justice.gov.uk and they will get back to her in 5 days.

A recovery letter arrived in the post today from VCS giving us 7 days to pay before action.

There is also another concern; the defence was filed within the deadline for 4pm last Monday 22nd based on the 19th June letter from CCBC (receipt confirms email sent on the evening of Sunday 21st) The defence was done as guidance on this site ie not using the online form but stating Defence and the case number in the email and on the pdf, signed and dated – is there a possibility of a problem with this such that they have ignored the defence? I wonder since if they had not received the AOS they would presumably have issued the instruction to pay earlier?

I have to submit the defence for the second claim in my name by Mon 29th (based on 25th June CCBC letter) and fear the same fate if there is a problem with the format

ThatJoeSoap

Just a quick update to this rather long running thread.

My wife and I had two claims from VCS for the same vehicle both in 2015, one for alleged breach of no stopping restrictions at Doncaster Airport and one for parking in a private car park of a vacant industrial unit.

Happily the Doncaster Airport case was dismissed as VCS failed to issue their witness statement in time, I emailed the court and eventually the judge struck it out.

No such luck on the second instance, we have received the full witness statement from VCS with evidence of their contract with DTZ the letting agents. photos of signage etc.

The original defence was based on either no signage or at least inadequate signage on entering the car park direct from public highway. Google maps evidence indicated a window of only 6 days from a photo showing no signage at all to the date of the PCN. The evidence shows signs to a perimeter fence/wall of the unit about the closet of which is about 10m away from the actual car park entrance. It is entirely possible to miss these compared to an overt sign at the entrance especially there is non signage on the'open side of the car park where my wife was parked. Can anyone advise if the definition of 'adequate signage' allows for such remote positioning while still complying with IPC guidance to allow use of DVLA data?

Has the defence been successful that under contract law the prevention of car parking - ie no opportunity to buy a ticket (permit holder system) can be challenged? Alternatively is there a possible defence that this is trespass enforceable by the landowner only rather than DTZ as the letting agents?

I have scanned the full VCS witness statement and am happy to make this available to the forum to assist other users? The case law cited is
Thornton v Shoe Lane parking 1971 re offer and acceptance
Vine v Waltham Forest - VCS rely on their claim that the signage is prominent and visible on entry to the site - which it isn't.
Parking Eye v Beavis re legitimate interest in enforcement and 'neither extravagant nor unconscionable' charges - presumably this can be challenged regarding adequate signage and double charging as POFA threads.
Chaplair Limited v Kumari 2015 re rights to damages over the £60 'debt recovery charge'

Any guidance on the potential strengths or weaknesses of these approaches would be gratefully received.