ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST!

Lego-9

Tuesday morning last week I successfully defended 2 residential claims (consolidated) before DDJ Royle in Sheffield. DDJR really went to town on the C (VCS). It was a joy to be part of – a joy to win and see the C shattered. Thankfully, I landed a very clued up Judge (J) who was very appreciative of my novice and commended efforts that I made + awarded my costs +£600. However, these efforts were not just mine so I consider this victory, ours. 
Thank you to everyone on this forum. Thank you to the expert members and their tireless efforts to make this forum an oasis amidst these pirates and their PCNs. Without this collective, many people would unfortunately succumb to the PPCs. In my instance and many others, it goes to show with a bit of research and some extra time in your day can go a long way in succeeding and defending a claim. I hope I can continue to help anyone that intends (strongly suggested) to defend a claim. 

The J dismissed the claim on three counts + grilled the C for further negligence. 

The J was satisfied that my Tenancy gave me unfettered right to park my vehicle in the noted grounds and the PPC had no right to override my rights through imposing conditions of parking without being an agent or party to the tenancy.

The J also had been satisfied that there had not been a clear chain of contractual command from the PPC to the landowner. I had requested the chain of command at LBC stage (Template Used). The contract provided by the C at my set aside hearing had not been an agreement with the landowner. I made my main defence around this point. Read through the contract and applied for a Land Registry title to evidence that the landowner had not been the party in contract with the C.

The J would have been willing to dismiss the Claim just off the fact that the witness statement had been provided by someone who had been employed a year and bit after the event of parking and would have dismissed their WS. 

The J went further on to grill the C for sending the WS on the morning of the hearing and lack of detail of their POCs. The J further went onto to state that they were perilously close to being in a position to award further costs for unreasonable litigation under CPR. 

The J awarded my costs for the day + set aside hearing fees. Tried to push my £1200 total cost but the J wasn't satisfied, although very close they were, that the C had acted and litigated unreasonably. 

Please do ask anything about the process and I will do my best to respond!
Happy fighting everyone.

 

Coupon-mad

I landed a very clued up Judge (J) who was very appreciative of my novice and commended efforts that I made + awarded my costs +£600.   

The J went further on to grill the C for sending the WS on the morning of the hearing and lack of detail of their POCs. The J further went onto to state that they were perilously close to being in a position to award further costs for unreasonable litigation under CPR. 

The J awarded my costs for the day + set aside hearing fees. Tried to push my £1200 total cost but the J wasn't satisfied, although very close they were, that the C had acted and litigated unreasonably. 

You would have thought the bit in bold would be enough to tip that balance into unreasonable conduct, plus the fact the claim was exaggerated by £60 that was never on the signs (and even if it was, it's unrecoverable due to Beavis and the POFA!).

Very well done, you earned the virtual t-shirt and if you could give your claim number and which residential car park this was about, others in the same place can use it and contact you perhaps?   Your set aside thread is here:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6003921/claimant-fixed-contract-expired/p1

If you still live there are you planning to get the residents together to now remove all trace of a parking firm?

Lego-9

Many thanks for your advice in my previous thread.
You would think I should have been awarded. Not to mention that the C used an address knowing it was incorrect - hence the set aside. The J wasn't satisfied though. He seemed reluctant to pursue the C further.

Claims E3QZ84VY and E4QZ75VY on 25/02/2020 at SheffieldCC before DDJ Royle. The residential park in question is a small underground site on Napier Street, Sheffield. However the conditions of entry are probably applicable to all similar sites.

I do not live there, however, I am planning on posting a memo to all residents so that they are aware of what happened. 

Umkomaas

From time to time each PPC pursuing via the courts will come across someone who is self-assured, intelligent, bolshy, arsey and able enough to take them on in a slugging fest.  

They bit off more than they could chew here. Well done Lego-9. Nice one. 

D_P_Dance

Excellent result.

PPCs should be outlawed from all residential car parks, they depress rents and lower resale values.

beamerguy

Lego-9 said:

Many thanks for your advice in my previous thread.
You would think I should have been awarded. Not to mention that the C used an address knowing it was incorrect - hence the set aside. The J wasn't satisfied though. He seemed reluctant to pursue the C further.

Claims E3QZ84VY and E4QZ75VY on 25/02/2020 at SheffieldCC before DDJ Royle. The residential park in question is a small underground site on Napier Street, Sheffield. However the conditions of entry are probably applicable to all similar sites.

I do not live there, however, I am planning on posting a memo to all residents so that they are aware of what happened. 

Well done, and well done the judge. Another VCS failure that COST-A-LOT for VCS.
We don't expect Renshaw-smith to understand this, but what he must understand (he won't) that court spankings for VCS and Excel will increase dramatically this year as with every other scammer.

Whilst not the normal abuse of process, VCS attempted to abuse you and so this deserves a slot in the Abuse of process part 2 in the first post which includes other recent VCS spankings

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6103933/abuse-of-process-thread-part-2/p1?new=1
I would be asking the DVLA why they allow VCS/EXCEL to access their database when they bring abusive claims to court and fail. They have in the past been banned by the DVLA

Lego-9

Umkomaas said:

From time to time each PPC pursuing via the courts will come across someone who is self-assured, intelligent, bolshy, arsey and able enough to take them on in a slugging fest.  

I am honored umko, many thanks indeed. They really didn't expect what I put them through!

Could not have done it without all your tireless efforts on other threads, cheers to you.

Lego-9

D_P_Dance said:

Excellent result.

PPCs should be outlawed from all residential car parks, they depress rents and lower resale values.

Could not agree more. Hopefully with enough negative press, they will be driven out!

Lego-9

beamerguy said:

Well done, and well done the judge. Another VCS failure that COST-A-LOT for VCS.

Whilst not the normal abuse of process, VCS attempted to abuse you and so this deserves a slot in the Abuse of process part 2 in the first post which includes other recent VCS spankings

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6103933/abuse-of-process-thread-part-2/p1?new=1
I would be asking the DVLA why they allow VCS/EXCEL to access their database when they bring abusive claims to court and fail. They have in the past been banned by the DVLA

Thanks BG. Your forum engagement has been immensely beneficial through this process, it is greatly appreciated. 
You are right and at the time I tried to make it a point to the Judge of all counts of unreasonable behaviour + drawing from atleast 3 abuse of process dismissals by other judges for VCS cases. Judge was not having any of it. Hopefully the next defendant will have more luck.

D_P_Dance

You are right and at the time I tried to make it a point to the Judge of all counts of unreasonable behaviour 

There is nothing to stop you  taking the PPC to court tourself for thw time you have spent on this.  The going rate is £19.00 an hour.

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-courts/legal-system/taking-legal-action/small-claims/making-a-small-claim/

Lynseygirl1

Lego-9 said:

Tuesday morning last week I successfully defended 2 residential claims (consolidated) before DDJ Royle in Sheffield. DDJR really went to town on the C (VCS). It was a joy to be part of – a joy to win and see the C shattered. Thankfully, I landed a very clued up Judge (J) who was very appreciative of my novice and commended efforts that I made + awarded my costs +£600. However, these efforts were not just mine so I consider this victory, ours. 
Thank you to everyone on this forum. Thank you to the expert members and their tireless efforts to make this forum an oasis amidst these pirates and their PCNs. Without this collective, many people would unfortunately succumb to the PPCs. In my instance and many others, it goes to show with a bit of research and some extra time in your day can go a long way in succeeding and defending a claim. I hope I can continue to help anyone that intends (strongly suggested) to defend a claim. 

The J dismissed the claim on three counts + grilled the C for further negligence. 

The J was satisfied that my Tenancy gave me unfettered right to park my vehicle in the noted grounds and the PPC had no right to override my rights through imposing conditions of parking without being an agent or party to the tenancy.

The J also had been satisfied that there had not been a clear chain of contractual command from the PPC to the landowner. I had requested the chain of command at LBC stage (Template Used). The contract provided by the C at my set aside hearing had not been an agreement with the landowner. I made my main defence around this point. Read through the contract and applied for a Land Registry title to evidence that the landowner had not been the party in contract with the C.

The J would have been willing to dismiss the Claim just off the fact that the witness statement had been provided by someone who had been employed a year and bit after the event of parking and would have dismissed their WS. 

The J went further on to grill the C for sending the WS on the morning of the hearing and lack of detail of their POCs. The J further went onto to state that they were perilously close to being in a position to award further costs for unreasonable litigation under CPR. 

The J awarded my costs for the day + set aside hearing fees. Tried to push my £1200 total cost but the J wasn't satisfied, although very close they were, that the C had acted and litigated unreasonably. 

Please do ask anything about the process and I will do my best to respond!
Happy fighting everyone.

 

Hello... I am currently going through the same with Excel Parking. I have received my LBC & am looking at replying but can't seem to find a template which I think you may have used. Do you have this available at all?

Many thanks