Claim Form

CandyManCan

Hello everyone

I have read through some of the threads/newbie section and continuing to do so and hopefully write a good defence and overturn this claim by VCS.
Just want to say beforehand a lot of posters here that spend there time and replied to threads like this and they know who they are I can only admire your efforts with the time that you guys take out and spend replying to threads on this forum and others that some of us that are not even aware of...


Issue date 12th August 2019
AOC was done today.

An outline of what happened..
Driver parked on business premises in town centre, premises at the time had a big to let sign, been like that for at least 6 months,
Parked not in marked bay as there is not one but on the side kind of a tight gap, later driver returned and found a notice to keeper.
No signs were seen until later in that day when no cars were there the sign was behind the car. So it would of not been possible to see this parking sign with there only being one sign and a car was already parked in front of it..

Letters were sent to me the owner of vehicle but paid no attention to it because I thought less of it until now I have been asked to pay a sum of £276 includes £75 for court and legal rep costs...


My argument will be more around the fact that there was not a sign in sight and there was never a sign at these premises until that day (i believe VCS put the sign up same day or day before) at a position where if a car is parked in front of it you can see it.

I will be taking pictures of this etc but do I stand any chance?


Thanks

Redx

it wont be overturned, it may be struck out or dismissed, but not overturned

and its AOS , not AOC


there was no notice to keeper , there was a windscreen notice to the driver

an NTK comes in the post a few weeks later, to the KEEPER , not the owner
this has nothing to do with ownership, just the name on the V5C


we dont analyse chances , either pay or defend

your defence is based on legal arguments , including poor and inadequate signage , plus ABUSE OF PROCESS due to the added charges , see the thread by beamerguy and the posts in it at post #14 by coupon mad

you can tell the story at the WS stage, along with any pictures (Exhibits)

KeithP

With a Claim Issue Date of 12th August, and having done the Acknowledgement of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 16th September 2019 to file your Defence.

That's nearly four weeks away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence, but please don't leave it to the last minute.


When you are happy with the content, your Defence could be filed via email as suggested here:

Print your Defence.
1. Sign it and date it.
   
2. Scan the signed document back in and save it as a pdf.
   
3. Send that pdf as an email attachment to CCBCAQ@Justice.gov.uk
   
4. Just put the claim number and the word Defence in the email title, and in the body of the email something like 'Please find my Defence attached'.
   
5. Log into MCOL after a few days to see if the Claim is marked "defence received". If not chase the CCBC until it is.
   
6. Do not be surprised to receive an early copy of the Claimant's Directions Questionnaire, they are just trying to keep you under pressure.
   
7. Wait for your DQ from the CCBC, or download one from the internet, and then re-read post #2 of [URL="https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4816822NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread[/URL] to find out exactly what to do with it.

The_Deep

You might struggle in court if their ducks are aligned precisely, as they appear to have you bang to rights.

However £276 is far more than the law allows, they are trying to scam you so read this.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6014081times out of ten these tickets are scams so consider complaining to your MP.

Parliament is well aware of the MO of these private parking companies, and on 15th March 2019 a Bill was enacted to curb the excesses of these shysters. Codes of Practice are being drawn up, an independent appeals service will be set up, and access to the DVLA's date base more rigorously policed, persistent offenders denied access to the DVLA database and unable to operate.

Hopefully life will become impossible for the worst of these scammers, but until this is done you should still complain to your MP, citing the new legislation.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/enacted

Just as the clampers were finally closed down, so hopefully will many of these Private Parking Companies.

CandyManCan

Thanks for the replies everyone
I have been reading up on different threads with others and trying to get as much knowledge as possible to defend myself in court and hopefully get this struck out.

Does anyone know if the property where the ticket was given has been sold a few couple of months after, what actually happens?
As I believe either this place where I parked as it was vacant for a long time it has been sold on or been let to another company.. Where do I stand?
Does it matter, would VCS still act on behalf of the land owner or not?

Thanks

KeithP

It's been two weeks between your posts.

Please don't let this 'project' run away from you.

You now have less than two weeks to file your Defence.

There are seventeen examples of Defences linked from post #2 of the NEWBIES thread - just pick one that nearly fits your circumstances and hone it to perfection.

CandyManCan

KeithP wrote: »

It's been two weeks between your posts.

Please don't let this 'project' run away from you.

You now have less than two weeks to file your Defence.

There are seventeen examples of Defences linked from post #2 of the NEWBIES thread - just pick one that nearly fits your circumstances and hone it to perfection.

I have not been as active as I should of been, just reading threads here and there but I am putting most of my focus now on this.

One thing I came across coupon mads thread in post #2 in the newbie sticky about the SAR to request it.
Here he mentioned asking;

"- ALL photos taken
- all letters/emails sent and received, including any appeal correspondence earlier
- if the car park was Pay and Display, ALWAYS ask for a PDT machine record from that day, of payments made (VRNs can be partially redacted but insist on getting this and follow it up if they refuse).
- all data held, all evidence they will rely on, and a full copy of the PCN, NTK
- and a list of all PCNs they consider are outstanding against you and/or this VRN, and remind them that any claim must be for all PCNs in one claim, not several separate claims."

I do recall A PCN from VCS about 9 months before this one but at a different location, only a windscreen PCN was given and since then there was not 1 letter about it.

About 18months ago another PCN on windscreen but don't think this was VCS as again no letters were sent.

So will this go against me asking for this SAR and they turn around and think wait a minute heres a PCN we given this car on so and so date and then try and do my head in for that as well?

Thanks

Redx

coupon mad is a SHE , not a HE

if you sent a SAR to the DPO at VCS their reply should contain ALL the data about you and your vehicle , not just one incident , unless there was only one incident , ALL DATA means all data , catch all , everything

as for the site , you may find a business closes down but the landowner can stay the same , be it debenhams stores , staples , whoever , a contract has to flow either from landowner to VCS , or via a third party where 2 contract or more may be in force , but always showing a flow from landonwer through to VCS (or to whichever parking company is involved)

just because a business closes down doesnt mean there is no parking contract , parking contracts could have been signed irrespective of any business on the site , or even empty premises

as mentioned above , you have a live court claim, so one defence point is the question of landowner authority , be it direct or flowing indirectly , which may have nothing to do with any closed business

you put them to proof , it comes out in the WS + Exhibits stage

concentrate on your defence, tick tock

Le_Kirk

If you haven't yet submitted a SAR it is too late to help your defence (PPCs have 30 days to respond) but don't despair as the data contained in response to SARs are normally most helpful at Witness Statement stage. As advised above, get on with your defence and post it up here for critique.

CandyManCan

Apologies coupman mad,

I wrote this, used a most of the points in other artles,,

IN THE COUNTY COURT

CLAIM No: XXXXX

BETWEEN:
VEHICLE CONTROL SERVICES LTD (Claimant)

-and-

(Defendant)

DEFENCE

1. The Defendant was the registered keeper of vehicle registration number XXXXX on the material date. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.

2. The facts are that the vehicle, registration XXXXX, appears, from the sparse evidence supplied by this Claimant, to be parked on the material date, the location of which the vehicle there was no signage of private property.
In it position was a No Parking sign which was stuck on the wall. No signs for private property was in sight

3.The car was parked in such a position that due to the location of signage it would not be possible to see it due to it's position it can be easily obscured in view by other vehicles therefore a contract would not have been entered into with the driver of vehicle as there is no clear signage or indication to what contract is entered into.

The building was currently not in use and had a TO LET sign, it has been empty for several months and there has been no contract or notices about private land/property, I would like to see evidence of the date contracts were agreed with landowner and the date in which it was agreed to put these notices up.


The signage on and around the site in question was small, unclear and not prominent and did not meet the Independent Parking Community (IPC) Code of Practice. The Claimant was a member of the IPC at the time and committed to follow its requirements. Therefore, no contract has been formed with the Defendant to pay £100.00, or any additional fee charged if unpaid in 28 days.

4 The Claimant is put to strict proof that it has sufficient proprietary interest in the land, or that it has the necessary authorisation from the landowner to issue parking charge notices, and to pursue payment by means of litigation.

5 The claim includes an additional £60.00, described as a debt collection charge. The Defendant believes this to be an abuse of process as these charges were not stated as part of the supposed contract. Judges have disallowed all added parking firm 'costs' in County courts up and down the Country. In Claim number F0DP201T on 10th June 2019, District Judge Taylor sitting at the County Court at Southampton, echoed an earlier General Judgment or Order of DJ Grand, who on 21st February 2019 sitting at the Newport (IOW) County Court, had struck out a parking firm claim.

6 Accordingly, it is denied that any contravention or breach of clearly signed/lined terms occurred, and it is denied that the driver was properly informed about any parking charge, either by signage or by a CN.

7 The Particulars of Claim does not state whether they believe the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or the driver of the vehicle. These assertions indicate that the Claimant has failed to identify a Cause of Action, and is simply offering a menu of choices. As such, the Claim fails to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4, or with Civil Practice Direction 16, paras. 7.3 to 7.5. Further, the particulars of the claim do not meet the requirements of Practice Direction 16 7.5 as there is nothing which specifies how the terms were breached.

8. Due to the sparseness of the particulars, it is unclear as to what legal basis the claim is brought, whether for breach of contract, contractual liability, or trespass. However, it is denied that the Defendant, or any driver of the vehicle, entered into any contractual agreement with the Claimant, whether express, implied, or by conduct.

9. At best, parking without authorisation could be from for the landowner to pursue, in the event that damages were caused by a trespass. A parking charge cannot be dressed up by a non-landowner parking firm, as a fee, or a sum in damages owed to that firm for positively inviting and allowing a car to trespass. Not only is this a nonsense, but the Supreme Court decision in ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67, confirmed that ParkingEye could not have pursued a sum in damages for t12County Court transcripts supporting the Defendant's position will be adduced, and in all respects, the Beavis case is distinguished.

10 The POFA, at Section 4(5) states that the maximum sum that may be recovered from the keeper is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper, in this case £100. The claim includes an additional £60, for which no calculation or explanation is given, and which appears to be an attempt at double recovery. The Defendant has the reasonable belief that the Claimant has not incurred £60 costs to pursue an alleged £100 or £160 debt.

11 In summary, it is the Defendant's position that the claim discloses no cause of action, is without merit, and has no real prospect of success. Accordingly, the Court is invited to strike out the claim of its own initiative, using its case management powers pursuant to CPR 3.4.

Yours faithfully
xxxxx



What do you guys think,

Coupon-mad

All your paras need a number and at the moment, some do not have one.

Some better wording here might be:

2. The facts are that the vehicle, registration XXXXX, appears, from the sparse evidence supplied by this Claimant, to be parked on the material date, the location of which the vehicle there was no signage of private property.
[STRIKE]In it position[/STRIKE] Instead, there was a complete prohibition, a No Parking sign which was stuck on the wall. No signs for private property [STRIKE]was[/STRIKE] were in sight and no terms & conditions and no 'parking charge' could have been agreed. ''No parking'' is not an offer and there was no consideration, thus the elements of a contract were not met.