Received County Court Business Centre Claim

Coupon-mad

Are you joking? I wasn't suggesting you put that in your WS. I said I was quoting it:

''To help you use some relevant quotes from the Beavis case CoA stage''.

Some relevant quotes. That's all. I was giving you the bullets.

Otherwise how are you going to argue that point if the Judge says ''I don't know about that, what was said at CoA stage then? This is something I am not familiar with about the Beavis case''. And it's no good if you then say ''no idea. Someone told me the CoA said that...''.

Also you are not at defence stage.

And we already tell people to do a supplementary WS that is LONGER than that, with the CEC16 stuff on it, and it's a separate sheet, so it's easy to organise and doesn't increase the words in your WS.

None of your exhibits or evidence or supplementary sheets increases your WS.

nosferatu1001

Essentially free for 1 hour and paid after that, is a pay car park where the first tarriff is £0. Its still a pay and display car park.

Snakes_Belly

See the comments that I have made on Bananasparking's thread regarding the car park.

Snakes_Belly

Gumgirl won against VCS on this car park.

Snakes_Belly

Apart from the preamble my statement is very much like yours, including the photos although mine includes one from this week from the viewpoint of the driver coming down Ecclesall Road and turning in to demonstrate how difficult it would be to see that sign when crossing traffic during the day

That will completely knock a hole in the case that they often cite in their WS. Thornton v Shoe lane relates to a barrier car park in which the car stops at the barrier and the driver sees the sign which forms the contract. They also cite Vine v Waltham Forest which is taken totally out of context.

Not_so_old_oldie

Another question. Can you use the Claimant witness statement evidence and refer to that, or do you have to have a copy in your own WS?
Looking at the WS they have provided there are things like the PDT logs and poor photos that I want to reference. Can i refer to Claimant evidence xx on page xx that shows...

I'm trying to build on Bananasparking advice on signage

Redx

Yes you can refer to their WS and tear it apart

Coupon-mad

Not_so_old_oldie wrote: »

Another question. Can you use the Claimant witness statement evidence and refer to that, or do you have to have a copy in your own WS?
Looking at the WS they have provided there are things like the PDT logs and poor photos that I want to reference. Can i refer to Claimant evidence xx on page xx that shows...

Of course.

See examples ALREADY DONE MANY TIMES OVER by searching:

VCS witness statement demolished

and

VCS Roch Vine

This is all over the forum over the past year or two, done to death by umpteen posters, just waiting for you to read their threads and copy!

And Simon Renshaw-Smith's team's word document (make it up as you go along, copy and edit what you want) 'PDT logs' have been shown to be false, in court, as well. Pretty sure a false example of a PDT machine 'record' by the Excel/VCS stable of companies, was shown to Judge Skalaskij-Reynolds at Skipton, by lamilad once. Here you go:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5869594/court-report-excel-spanked-at-skipton

Excel Parking Services Ltd vs Ambler. E1DP2061

The Judge noted that the missing entries were all before the Ds entry time (9.25am) so she flicked through the logs to see if there was a record of the Ds VRM on either copy or something similar (perhaps a wrong digit was entered). Here she spotted that 4 VRM entries that were on the first copy had been removed from the second, between 9.24 and 9.31. She was fuming, she launched a furious attack on Excel about the fact the evidence had been ‘altered’. She said she was already ‘deeply concerned’ that earlier entries were missing but to see that entries at the ‘material time had been removed was absolutely shocking and very troubling. Her voice was strained, she was practically shouting. She was saying that ‘messing with material evidence’ was completely unacceptable and something that the C ‘must not do’… They cannot and must not alter evidence to suit their case. SR said she was ‘disturbed’ by this; it was ‘absolutely inexcusable’.

Excel had the brass neck to try to appeal it! REFUSED:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/v1xdk8n8xdglddg/Ambler%20appeal%20Judgement%20p1.jpg?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/xkg9laxjeyb06za/img004.jpg?dl=0

If part of your argument is that you believe the driver did pay, then you need to put those 2 links into evidence - make sure it is the ones I linked and not the other link without the Defendant's name.

HTH

Not_so_old_oldie

Another VCS bites the dust.

Judge found in my favour within about 5 minutes. Claimant failed to prove there was a privacy of contract.
I only had to say "good afternoon" and state how much I earned at the end to prove I should get the £95 costs back.

VCS weren't helped with the fact that the judge didn't have their witness statement to which their solicitor could only apologise. It was, by the judges own words, "a strange situation".
He did look at the photos of signage and could not clearly state that the contract was with VCS.

The judge praised the effort that I'd put in and awarded my costs to be paid by 13th Feb.

Quite exciting really to have my time in court (first time, hopefully last!).

Oh, and after the judgement I offered up the following to the judge, only to inform him of the exact same case thrown out for unclear signage which happened to make the local paper just last night.

https://www.thestar.co.uk/news/traffic-and-travel/judge-throws-out-fines-issued-notorious-sheffield-car-park-1378720

Coupon-mad

Nice one, and very good to offer the Judge further reading, to help others!

ANOTHER VCS / EXCEL ONE BITES THE DUST, as you rightly say!

Judge found in my favour within about 5 minutes. Claimant failed to prove there was a privacy of contract.
I only had to say "good afternoon" and state how much I earned at the end to prove I should get the £95 costs back.

The judge praised the effort that I'd put in and awarded my costs to be paid by 13th Feb.

Quite exciting really to have my time in court (first time, hopefully last!).

Very well done.

:T