A PCN at claim stage with a Contract Hire Vehicle advice sought/few Q's

KeithP

And to expand on my earlier post, para 6.5 says:

6.5. That this agreement shall be extended immediately following the expiration date, and will continue to roll over each anniversary for a further fixed period, as outlined in clause 2, unless the Client gives notice of termination in writing to the company's registered office by recorded delivery not less than fourteen days prior to the expiration date or subsequent anniversary dates.

Castle

According to 3.7 they, (VCS), are required to comply with the BPA Code of Practice.

SophS

According to 3.7 they, (VCS), are required to comply with the BPA Code of Practice

I think I’m going to have to rely on paragraph 14 of my WS above for my best chance at court then.

I posted the finished version it but didn’t receive a comment on it. It’s sent in now anyway.

Coupon-mad

Castle wrote: »

According to 3.7 they, (VCS), are required to comply with the BPA Code of Practice.

So the contract cannot be current - even more than this, May 2012 was 'pre-POFA' and before the clamping ban. You need to mention this at the hearing.

So they are trying to rely upon what can only be described in court (by you) as:

''...an out of date clamping/immobilising contract from when VCS (run by 'Captain Clampit', Simon Renshaw-Smith*) were required (in the contract) to be in the BPA AOS (they left in 2014), and which takes no account of the October 2012 statutory legislation - the POFA, Schedule 4 - that followed. That Act banned clamping 'enforcement' and introduced a restricted right to keeper/hirer liability, but not retrospectively. That contract from May 2012 cannot have contained the definitions re 'keeper liability' and the operator's potential ability to sue keepers, that a current contract must have.''

Ask them for the current contract (in court, not now!) and/or cast HUGE doubt in the Judge's mind. Part of winning in court is about smashing the Claimant's weak evidence.


*
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/04928127/officers

https://www.facebook.com/groups/147086772099736/permalink/1378846295590438/

https://www.express.co.uk/finance/crusader/826750/Blue-badge-parking-ticket-holder-charge-debt-collectors

SophS

Coupon-mad I’m sorry if I sound thick but most of that has flown right over my head.
Is it a valid contract giving VCS authority to operate parking enforcement or just one that has an outdated enforcement procedure included in it eg clamping?

I don’t understand the clamping part since I wasn’t clamped and the contract states that clamping is just one of three ways they carry out parking enforcement.


And on another note. This contract is identical to the one they used in Claim E0DP2634 hearing date June 2018, which was won on the grounds that the contract had expired in Aug 2012 for a pcn issued Oct 2015.

It had the same clause 6.5 identical in wording to the one in the link above.

Coupon-mad

It's EASY to understand. A contract dated May is before the law changed in October.

This contract is identical to the one they used in Claim E0DP2634 hearing date June 2018, which was won on the grounds that the contract had expired in Aug 2012 for a pcn issued Oct 2015.

It had the same clause 6.5 identical in wording to the one in the link above

Good, include that then!

This is about casting doubt in the Judge's mind.

A PRE-POFA contract CANNOT be current.

I didn't say they clamped you, nor did I say the contract even mentions clamping. I said it's an archive out of date contract from before the law changed, when 'parking enforcement' (by definition) included clamping BUT did not include hirer/keeper liability!

And the contract required the PPC to be an AOS member of the BPA. They have not been, since 2014. So that contract MUST have changed or be expired, due to all those statutory and regulatory changes, signage the lot. Everything had to be changed at the end of 2012 - including signs - to reflect the law change.

SophS

Well....I made a boob on my defence and WS as I made reference to VCS being a BPA member.
Finding that VCS also make reference to the same membership on their contract is after the fact I guess. However I will mention the contradiction in the skeleton argument.

First, I wondered if can you point me to the link that states the October date change of POFA?
When I look on legislation.gov.uk site it only states the year 2012 - where can I find amendment date?

as the VCS contract was created the same year - I need to take to show it was created prior to the October POFA changes you mention above. ...as well as pointing out the contradiction of trade association ‏membership.

Redx

it wasnt amended in 2012 , the enactment date was 01 October 2012 , the day it came into force as a new law

VCS were BPA members at that time , you can see the date they switched to the IPC by looking at them on the IPC AOS list

they are still corporate members of the BPA , just not using the AOS option of the BPA

so they are members of BOTH trade bodies, but since their IPC inception they only use the IPC CoP since that date and the IAS since that date, yet the contract predates POFA , so clearly has issues due to POFA, never mind BPA membership requirements

KeithP

Section 56 of POFA covers it:

SophS

RedX, KeithP, Coupon-mad. ...

I have also been receiving advice tips etc to on a FB private parking court defence group...and on the above someone said the following which has taken the wind out of my sails a bit.

“Their contract to operate has nothing to do with POFA. They are two seperate and unconnected things.

The contract says nothing about what means enforcement will take. That's up to VCS. They were in the BPA at the time the contract was signed and up to 2014 but if the ticket is 2019, all that compliance with BPA is irrelevant. They were in the IPC in 2019 and that's who's rules apply.

The contract is a rolling contract - normal in these situations. It automatically renews unless either party cancel. 6.5 of the contract. It hasn't been cancelled so is still live.

Pofa is all about keeper liability, so you need the Notice to keeper to see if they meet the terms and conditions in order to recover the charge from the keeper. It should be in their witness statement. If you have it post it here. You still have the option of a skeleton argument to challenge what their witness statement claims”.

Any thoughts? I thought the old contract would have been a strong part of my defence.