Almost Imminent Court Case pending with VCS

Loum5

Hello!

I'm possibly a little late to the party here, but have been looking over this forum and found the advice and positive attitudes to be really helpful, so wanted to try and seek any assistance with my impending case.

I'll try to keep it short....but my situation is as follows....
Over 4 years ago I received a PCN from VCS in a retail carpark for ‘returning to a carpark within the no return period/time’. The carpark was reasonably close to my work, and due to traffic congestion on that day causing me to take an alternative route, I unknowingly parked there without thinking about, looking for or noticing any signage.

The following day I discovered a colleague had also previously received a PCN in the same carpark. I ignored my PCN on their advice as they had contacted the landowners and were advised VCS did not have their permission to issue tickets on that land. The retailer has since ceased trading and been replaced, and VCS no longer operate at the site (now run by UKCPS). I did not take any photos at the time.

Given the time lapse I am 95% sure I did not receive a postal NTK, but did get debt collection letters that I opened all at the same (as I tend to ignore mail that appears to be/is junk) and no longer have them in my possession.

Around May this year I got a Letter Before Claim, swiftly followed by the Court Claim Form. I have noted that in the PoC and searching VCS in forums, this is a generic PoC and VCS appear to have done a bulk load with the same content without looking at individual cases all over the country – a major point for me is ‘T&Cs clearly displayed at the entrance’ as historical Google Earth does not back this up!!

Since then, under advice, I wrote to VCS with a 'Request for documents mentioned in a statement of case under CPR 31.14' as I have no evidence to base my defence on again given the time lapse (sent registered post and have proof it was signed for), but they failed to respond. I have submitted my defence (which I am kicking myself about as did not refer to myself as 'the defendant' as I now know I should have – I can upload this on here if needed), completed the DQ and sent to VCS and the Court (VCS did not send their DQ to me as I'm told they should have), and have my official Court date and need to submit my WS within the next few weeks. I have been offered the Mediation, but having read deterring posts about this on here, I feel it is not the right choice for me (and hope this is not to my detriment for not trying this free service?!) as I really want to fight this all the way both on principal and potentially not having to pay the thieves the ridiculous inflated amount they’re claiming….after 4 years of nothing!!

I again have that awful sick feeling of anxiety I had when writing my defence! But after finding out a friend had won a case recently after advice on here (different circumstances) I wanted to seek any advice on my WS – I have looked over the Newbies thread but not seen a case the same as mine, so hoped from what I have said (and I can provide any other information/redacted copies of docs or photos I have), someone might be able to point me in the right direction as to the best way to focus – or if indeed I have a chance of defeating these scoundrels, or am I wasting my time?!

This actually is a short version!!!! Any advice would be greatly appreciated and many thanks in advance.

Loum5

Just a couple of additional points I thought to add in case this has any baring:

I have no way of knowing what any signage may have said at the time of the alleged contravention as to what the contract was I supposedly entered into on ‘entering the carpark’.

I made contact with the landowners prior to submitting my defence this year, and was advised that around this time 4 years ago a former employee of the landowners was in the process of dismissing the contract between them and VCS due to being unhappy with their conduct - though they could not provide actual dates or written proof of this (so have not mentioned this in the defence).

Redx

Post the defence below

Post the POC from the claim form

Post the charges breakdown and total claimed

Read the abuse of process thread by beamerguy reading post #14 by coupon mad

What's gone is gone , so start on your WS plus Exhibits plus costs schedule now , as a bundle to go to the court and to VCS , check the date that the bundle needs submitting

Read other VCS court case threads , even ones dissimilar to yours , from this year

Email a SAR to the DPO at VCS asap if not done already

Loum5

Thank you for your quick response - here are the the items as requested:

Defence:

Claim Number: XXXXXXX
BETWEEN:
Vehicle Control Services Limited (Claimant)
vs
XXX (Defendant)
Defence
1. The Defendant was the registered keeper and was the driver of vehicle registration number XXXXXX on the material date (xxxxxxxx). The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.
2. Each and every allegation in the Claimants statement of case is denied unless specifically admitted in this Defence.

3. In order for the Claimant to win their case there are a number of issues to be decided by the Court.
a. Does Vehicle Control Services Limited (“VCSL”) have a contract with the landowners or occupiers of the xxxxxxxxxx Carpark (“the Carpark”) that allows them to operate?
b. Are the signs “large, prominent and legible, so that any reasonable user of the car park would be aware of their existence and nature, and would have a fair opportunity to read them if he or she wished to do so” as was the situation in ParkingEye Limited v Beavis (UKSC 2015/0116)?
c. If the signs are large, prominent and legible, can the wording actually create a contract?

4. The alleged contravention took place several years ago and so I, the Defendant, am now at a significant disadvantage since I am unable to confirm the position of any alleged signage or review the wording on any alleged signage that was there four years ago. I am unable to answer any of the above questions myself as, despite the fact that I requested VCSL to provide certain documentation (Request for documents mentioned in a statement of case under CPR 31.14), they have failed to respond and provide any of the information I requested. I have a copy of my letter of 1 July 2019 that was sent by registered post and also a printout of the confirmation of receipt, as signed for by a representative of VCSL on 2 July 2019. Nevertheless, I have attempted to provide an answer to these questions myself but, since the information has not been provided I am, again, at a disadvantage in preparing my defence.

5. I have not received confirmation from VCSL that they do, indeed, have a contract with the landowners or occupiers. I visited the Carpark on 27 June 2019 to see what was said on the signs to answer questions 3.b. and 3.c. and found that VCSL do not operate the Carpark and so am unable to use the signs to confirm the nature of the contract between the landowner or occupier and VCSL as set out in paragraph 3.a.

6. Since VCSL have not replied to my letter, I am also unable to comment on either the size or prominence of any signage that VCSL claim to have been in the Carpark to answer the question posed in paragraph 3.b. I had asked VCSL to provide details of the size and location of the signs as I do not recall there being any signage at the entrance or in prominent places when I used the Carpark in August 2015.

7. On 27 June 2019, when I visited the Carpark, I examined the entrance to see what signs are currently situated in the Carpark and to see if any evidence exists of a previous sign. On approaching the Carpark from Leeds Inner Ring Road along Wellington Bridge Street there is currently no sign facing the driver and I could not see any place where a sign could have been attached in the past.

8. When approaching the Carpark from xxxxxxx Road the driver is faced with a small sign put up by the current operator of the Carpark. However, this corrugated plastic sign appears to be a recent and temporary sign. It is held in place by means of two thin strips of metal attached to a low post. I can see no indication of any permanent or longstanding post to carry a sign at the entrance.

9. As a result of my visit in June 2019, I do not believe that any prominent sign could have been displayed in August 2015 and I repeat my earlier statement that I do not recall seeing any prominent signs in August 2015.

10. As VCSL have not provided me with the wording of the signs and alleged contractual terms, I am unable to
answer the third question as set out in paragraph 3.c.

11. As the Claimant has not provided any evidence in support of their claim, the Court is invited to strike out their claim.


POC:
The claim is for a breach of contract for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. The defendant's vehicle. XXX XXX, was identified in the X & X carpark on the xx/xx/2015 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely returning to a carpark within the no return period/time. At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. The terms and conditions upon entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply, namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the Defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. The Claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.

Breakdown of costs:

Amount claimed: £160
Court fee: £25
Legal: £0.00
Total: £185

(On the LBC received there was an interest amount for over £45 which is not detailed in the Claim form)

I will take a look at what you have advised - thank you very much.

Court date is 20th December and WS needs to be submitted no later than 14 days before

Redx

the original amount was no more than £100 , not £160 , so abuse of process kicks in, see the coupon mad posts about it

Loum5

Brilliant, thank you - will take a look and will also delve into the SAR route, but think this could take longer than I need it to for submission of WS to when they have to respond in 30 days

Coupon-mad

I have no way of knowing what any signage may have said at the time of the alleged contravention as to what the contract was I supposedly entered into on ‘entering the carpark’.

Yes you do - probably. Google StreetView lets you change the date to look at older images, by clicking on the little arrow drop down of date choices, in the top left thumbnail image box.

I again have that awful sick feeling of anxiety I had when writing my defence!

We know. Read CEC16's thread, every post.

There is no such thing as 'registered post' (a very old term). Change that.

Remove this phrase:

In order for the Claimant to win their case

And re this:

The defendant's vehicle. XXX XXX, was identified in the X & X carpark on the xx/xx/2015 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely returning to a car park within the no return period/time.

It sounds like a double visit in one day, so unless you KNOW you did drive in twice that day, DO NOT admit to being the driver on both occasions! Surely it could have been you the first time then your partner or relative the second time? Or are you certain it was you?

To find the wording for a supplementary WS about why the Claimaint CANNOT claim £160 for £100 PCN, go to the Abuse of Process thread by beamerguy and get the wording and links to print out, in post #14.

AND read CEC16's thread right now! You need to understand why the CRA 2015 needs citing about the signs EVEN IF you can't find images on GoogleStreetView!

Loum5

Hi Coupon-mad

Thank you for your advice - I will get reading all the recommended threads this evening, thank you.

In response to some of your points:

I did check historical Google Earth ("GE") over the weekend - I have taken screenshots from April 2015 and May 2016 (the PCN was received between these dates), and again from May 2018, the latest available. On the earlier dates I can see the signs were dotted around the carpark but GE will not allow me up close to view the wording - I can however see there were absolutely zero signs in the entrance as stated in the PoC. In May 2018, when the carpark is now operated by UKCPS, I can go into the carpark with GE, and there is a small sign in the entrance as described in my defence.

“In order for the Claimant to win their case” Unfortunately this wording has already been submitted in my defence.

“The defendant's vehicle. XXX XXX, was identified in the X & X carpark on the xx/xx/2015 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely returning to a car park within the no return period/time.” It sounds like a double visit in one day……
I had not read it like this before – but I did NOT leave and then return, I was in the same space in the far corner of the carpark situated next to a walkway exit to the main road. I parked, walked through the walkway and returned later that day. Incidentally, I do still have the windscreen PCN with times observed on it approximately 2 hours 20 minutes apart, so not sure how this sits with your advice here with the PoC wording?

Coupon-mad

No-one uses Google Earth for this! I said:

Google StreetView lets you change the date to look at older images, by clicking on the little arrow drop down of date choices, in the top left thumbnail image box.

You can also drag the little yellow man to the entrance to virtually 'look' at the signs of most car parks, and go back to an older image.

I can however see there were absolutely zero signs in the entrance as stated in the PoC.

Good.

“The defendant's vehicle. XXX XXX, was identified in the X & X carpark on the xx/xx/2015 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely returning to a car park within the no return period/time.” It sounds like a double visit in one day……

I had not read it like this before – but I did NOT leave and then return, I was in the same space in the far corner of the carpark situated next to a walkway exit to the main road. I parked, walked through the walkway and returned later that day. Incidentally, I do still have the windscreen PCN with times observed on it approximately 2 hours 20 minutes apart, so not sure how this sits with your advice here with the PoC wording?

It sits very well with my advice because they have ruined their claim, surely?

The POC specifically says the claim is all about ''namely returning to a car park within the no return period/time'' therefore in your WS this should be your first point, and state as a fact that:

I did NOT leave the car park then return within the no return period/time. Thus, the Claimant's Claim is doomed to fail because the alleged conduct did not happen and their own ANPR evidence photos are at odds with their claim particulars, because there are only two camera images. The claim is fundamentally flawed because it is pleaded on the following premise:

''The claim is for a breach of contract for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. The defendant's vehicle. XXX XXX, was identified in the X & X car park on the xx/xx/2015 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely returning to a car park within the no return period/time''.

No such breach occurred and there is no cause of action. Given that this is a serial litigant which files thousands of parking charge cases, they should not be allowed any relief from sanctions and would be required to apply to the court for permission to amend their particulars at the usual court fee cost, if their claim is to continue.

Loum5

This is great, thank you so much. My sick anxiety feeling has temporarily shifted into an excitement pang!!

Also, please forgive my misuse of Google terminology - I did use StreetView as opposed to GE, and I did drop the yellow man as far as I could into the carpark - I will go back to this, but in the historic views I could not get close to the signs to view/read, and I was deferred to a black screen - not the case in the 2018 StreetView as was able to get right up to the parking space I used - I will try some different angles though.

Coupon-mad

Ah, that happens sometimes with GSV.

Re your case, nerves are normal but you can be confident. I was nervous on Monday before the hearing in CEC16's case. I needn't have been!