Defense for court claim - East Midlands Airport petrol station

LoveVCS_BFF

Quick update on this. We've submitted the defence and now have a date for court (sept 30th). I'm now going to go through and prepare a WS and evidence for each of the points in the defence. 

Question regarding:

1 - The facts are that the vehicle, registration <reg>, of which the Defendant is the registered keeper, appears from the sparse evidence supplied by this Claimant to have entered a petrol filling station from a private road and stopped briefly where bylaws apply, and as such cannot hold the keeper liable as this land entered is not relevant land.

So, am i right that this is saying that any airport bylaws don't apply because the land is not owned by the airport, it's owned by another company (Prax group)?

nosferatu1001

No. 
Land where parking is controlled by byelaws is not relevant land as defined in POFA2012
If it is not relvant land, the keeper cannot be liable, because keeper liabilty is only possible on relevant land. 

Coupon-mad

So, am i right that this is saying that any airport bylaws don't apply because the land is not owned by the airport, it's owned by another company (Prax group)?

It's the opposite really - that byelaws do apply to this land (among your exhibits, append a copy of the airport byelaws, and the official DFT Guidance to what was called 'section 56' of the POFA 2012, which makes it clear what 'not relevant land' means).  Google it.  Read it and use it.

LoveVCS_BFF

Thanks for the responses above.
Update
We had a letter from VCS today saying that, although they think they have a strong case, they want to offer a settlement of £125.
Is this normal, when they think they have a strong case?  I'm wondering if we should respond to say "close the case" or even push for early recovery of OUR costs rather than go to court?
 

g0wfv

Yes, all automated .....

Ignore it.

D_P_Dance

Whenthey say that they have a strong case, it often means that they think they have a weak case.  A discontinuence may follow shortly.

g0wfv

Just keep replying to the court papers at the appropriate times and see what happens. I'm currently playing the same game on behalf of my sister. Seems we're at the same stage. But be prepared to go all the way to court ........

Coupon-mad

They are likely to discontinue - loads are going that way now!

LoveVCS_BFF

Great to hear the opinions that they might discontinue. Thanks for the support.
I am replying to the letter (out of courtesy if nothing else) to decline their offer and remind them of our increasing costs.  

LoveVCS_BFF

This is the reply letter that i'm proposing to send.  Any reason i should not send it?
----

I am writing to you regarding the above claim, and in response to the letter you sent to me dated 12th June 2020. 

In this letter, you presented an offer of a reduced settlement of £125.  

I must decline this offer as I do not owe VCS any money. From my perspective, you have sent me an invoice for a large sum of money on the back of your assertion that we entered into a contract. You use the assumption that the terms of the contract that are displayed on a sign at the petrol station entrance are visible and readable to the driver of a moving vehicle, and that the driver implicitly accepted these terms by entering the car park.  In my view this is not fair nor reasonable.

I state my position above simply to demonstrate that I have considered your offer and am mindful that our dispute should ideally be resolved without the intervention of the courts. However, given my position is that I do not owe you any money, and yours is that I do owe you money, there is no middle ground.  

In regard to your comment at the end of the letter at regarding costs, I interpret this to mean that if I do not accept your offer of £125, you will raise the fact that you sent the offer letter to the court as an additional cost incurred by you. I interpret this to be an implicit threat by you that if I do not pay, you will endeavour to make me pay you even more money if I lose the case.

The reason for such an interpretation is that it aligns to your approach to the entire process from day one: you repeatedly send unsuspecting people very threatening letters saying they owe you money, that the amount will only increase as time goes on and that they should pay you to avoid going to court.  It is nothing short of bullying.

I would encourage you to discontinue your case against me and close this matter without the need for either party to attend court. This would mean I do not need to spend further time or money putting together my defence and evidence, and no longer suffer the stress and anxiety that comes with it.