Help, got until 24th November to submit Defence for VCS

Leviathan747

KeithP wrote: »

With a Claim Issue Date of 24th October, and having done the Acknowledgement of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Tuesday 26th November 2019 to file your Defence.

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

Cheers Keith. Will get reading!

Leviathan747

Worth mentioning GPOEL? That there doesn't seem to be planning permission for cameras and signs from Sheffield City Council?

KeithP

Leviathan747 wrote: »

Worth mentioning GPOEL?

No, definitely not.

bargepole

Leviathan747 wrote: »

So far we're going for no contract existed because he had thought the car park was free for 2 hours, there is no reason to look at entry signs in a free car park. Where he was parked, there was no signage (and he wouldn't have read them anyway).

The fact that historically the car park was free, and now isn't, does not absolve him from liability under the contract.

Anyone parking on private land should look for signs to see what the terms are, and a Court would rule that the signs were clearly there to be seen.

Fortunately, you do not have to rely upon those hopeless, and almost certainly losing, arguments, because there is a large elephant in the room.

The following paragraph should be front and centre of the Defence:

1. The Claim is issued in the name of Vehicle Control Services Ltd. (Company No. 04298820), whereas the signage displayed at the material location was, and is, in the name of Excel Parking Services Ltd. (Company No. 02878122), a separate legal entity. Any contract, in a private car park, is a deemed contract which can only be formed by signage, and it is therefore submitted that if there was any contract, it would have been between Excel and the Defendant. The present Claimant was not a party to such a contract, and therefore cannot sue on it, and has no standing to litigate in this matter.

Leviathan747

bargepole wrote: »

Fortunately, you do not have to rely upon those hopeless, and almost certainly losing, arguments, because there is a large elephant in the room.

The following paragraph should be front and centre of the Defence:

1. The Claim is issued in the name of Vehicle Control Services Ltd. (Company No. 04298820), whereas the signage displayed at the material location was, and is, in the name of Excel Parking Services Ltd. (Company No. 02878122), a separate legal entity. Any contract, in a private car park, is a deemed contract which can only be formed by signage, and it is therefore submitted that if there was any contract, it would have been between Excel and the Defendant. The present Claimant was not a party to such a contract, and therefore cannot sue on it, and has no standing to litigate in this matter.

PAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OMG, I even noticed that the signage was different from the claimant today, but didn't realise how important it was.

THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!

Is it worth me writing other things like signage is on passenger side on entry and at right angles to driver, so can't read it unless turn head 90 degrees?

Or should my defence just be one paragraph!

Leviathan747

bargepole wrote: »

1. The Claim is issued in the name of Vehicle Control Services Ltd. (Company No. 04298820), whereas the signage displayed at the material location was, and is, in the name of Excel Parking Services Ltd. (Company No. 02878122), a separate legal entity. Any contract, in a private car park, is a deemed contract which can only be formed by signage, and it is therefore submitted that if there was any contract, it would have been between Excel and the Defendant. The present Claimant was not a party to such a contract, and therefore cannot sue on it, and has no standing to litigate in this matter.

Hi Bargepol, sadly my celebration was short-lived! If you look at the tiny small print at the bottom of the meter signage, VCS is mentioned. Gahhhh!! Would have been so sweet....

hxxp://s575.photobucket.com/user/Solomon1_2009/library/VCS

bargepole

Ok. So here's what needs to be said instead:

The Claim is issued in the name of Vehicle Control Services Ltd. (Company No. 04298820). However, at the heading of the signage displayed at the material location it is displayed as Excel Parking Services Ltd. (Company No. 02878122), a separate legal entity. This creates uncertainty as to which is the contracting party.

One of the conditions stated at the top of the sign is 'Maximum Stay 2 Hrs - No Return Within 5 Hrs'. Lower down, under the list of contraventions for which Parking Charge Notices can be issued, it states 'Returning within 1 hour of exiting the car park'.

The effect of these contradictory and confusing terms, is that any purported or deemed contract is void for uncertainty of terms, such that the Defendant cannot be held liable to the Claimant for any alleged breach.

Le_Kirk

Your link made live@ -
https://s575.photobucket.com/user/Solomon1_2009/library/VCS?page=1

Leviathan747

Cheers Bargepool and Le-Kirk! Thank you for your kind interest to help, much appreciated.

Leviathan747

bargepole wrote: »

One of the conditions stated at the top of the sign is 'Maximum Stay 2 Hrs - No Return Within 5 Hrs'. Lower down, under the list of contraventions for which Parking Charge Notices can be issued, it states 'Returning within 1 hour of exiting the car park'.

Hi Bargepole. Have read the small print, and it does say 'Returning within 5 hours of exiting the car park'. So we can't use that bit?