VCS Berkeley Precinct Sheffield

mkv123

So I have fallen afoul of VCS's change to the number of free hours available for free parking at the Berkeley Precinct in Sheffield (changed from 2 free to 1 not too long ago but haven't been in a while) - made known to me by a postal PCN that arrived 15 days after the incident but is conveniently dated (and not postmarked) so that it was supposedly received within 11 days.

The reason I'm making a new thread is (having read the newbies thread) they have changed all the signage to make it clear (as far as I can tell which I somehow didn't notice) so previous threads about this are no longer accurate. One point is there are no signs for the spots facing the road directly at all pretty much but that's it and to be honest, I don't remember where I parked. The deadline I can pay £60 in is the 25th of March and I really don't want to have to pay more than this so I'd really appreciate any quick advice.

My main point is, from my understanding, it only makes sense to challenge these parking tickets when they are actually wrong as opposed to blatantly parking on someone else's land (so you will win in court). Here I deserve to have received this ticket if I had known about the change in hours but I feel the change was unnoticed and the fine exorbitant, hence my hesitation to pay. My only hope lies in a problem with the signage and the contract entered or with the actual legality for VCS changing the hours from 2 to 1.

This second point comes after reading this article: (will not let me post article so here is a description) "The star judge throws out fines issued at notorious Sheffield car park" (searching this into google will find the article), but at the bottom, it says VCS maintain they have the right so whether they cemented that right I do not know. I tried to get in touch with the journalists or people in the article but with no luck and I have been unable to find a good way to find the contract VCS have with the landowner.

Regarding the sign point, another recent post regarding VCS does mention the change in signs and a reply from the IAS which states the signage is sufficient but I don't know how important that is given the IAS's reputation.

I would appreciate your rapid advice on how to proceed so I have options before the 25th deadline please and as I know VCS are litigatious, I would like to have a decent chance of winning the case.
Kind regards,
Mvk123

Redx

Put some paragraphs in if you want advice , ensure you have read and understood the newbies sticky thread too

Bear in mind the only way to be sure of getting rid of this is a landowner complaint , or a judge throwing it out

We rarely advise anyone to pay it

mkv123

Thank you, have updated with edits. I did read the newbies thread but I understand I should only follow that if I’ll win in court seeing as VCS take most cases to court so I don’t know whether I should follow that advice as I’m not sure my case would win? I was looking for advice whether I have a winning chance or not.

Also surely if I paid they couldn’t try and get more out of me?
kind regards,
Mkv123

Fruitcake

There are lots of points that would lead to a win, especially if/when VCS add on a fake £60 that is being thrown out by many judges up and down the country.

Normal defence points would be: -
Not the landowner
No standing (no valid contract) to issue charges or court claims
Abuse of process
Inadequate signage
Non PoFA complaint NTK

 to name but a few.

You have nothing to lose by doing the initial appeal if you don't get a landowner cancellation first.

Also, check with the council planning department to what the original allowed parking time was when planning permission was granted. It is not unknown for scammers to arbitrarily reduce it in breach of the original planning approval.
While you are at it, find out if the scammers have planning permission for ANPR scameras and advertising consent for signs. Not having the latter is a criminal offence. Find out how many signs were approved as a change from that number might also be a planning breach. 
Complain to the council about any breaches, and tell the local press as well to warn others about this scam. 

Please tell us the date of the alleged event and the date of issue of the NTK just in case there is any mileage in that. Also check to see if the wording is PoFA compliant or not.

Redx

The so called fine is the daily default tariff and it's not exorbitant , not in a legal sense , the Supreme court upheld £85 in the Beavis case a few years ago in his free to park case , but the signs were better on that site as well

The £100 default that is allowed has been around for a decade , so claiming that it is exorbitant will fail , ditto with £60

If you break the rules on Manchester Metrolink like underpaying or not paying then the default is £100 too

You may win in court on signage , landowner authority , POFA 2012 , the CRA 2015 , all manner of technicality issues , but your VCS appeal will likely fail , which is stage 2 and you have not mentioned doing stage 1 , which is a landowner complaint to get them to cancel it at source , so get the landowner or managing agent complaint in , now , today , because that is actually your best option for a successful outcome

Only a judge can decide on your success ability to win the case , as you found out in those press articles , nobody on here can do so , it's Judge bingo and the crystal balls are cloudy

D_P_Dance

Read this

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6116701/let-us-ignore-all-pcns-not-for-milquetoasts/p1

Nine times out of ten these tickets are scams, so consider complaining to your MP, it can cause the scammer extra costs and work, and has been known to get the charge cancelled.

Parliament is well aware of the MO of these private parking companies, many of whom are former clampers, 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, when life gets back to normal, it will become impossible for those scammers who are left to continue their vile trade, 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.

mkv123

I'm really struggling with how to find the landowner. That was the first thing I tried to do but I found myself unable to get anywhere. I would appreciate any help with this or advice on how in particular to do this as I traced it to a company but whenever I try calling anyone, due to the current situation, people aren't manning the phones (I believe).

The NTK did arrive late so should be non POFA but the way they dated has made it so that if you assume the royal mail delivers in two days, then it made it on time and its conveniently not postmarked. I don't think I can argue this point right?

There is significant on-site signage apart from one side with no signs at all. Could I argue this? In terms of planning permission, they have permission for two signs at the entrance but they have erected some other signs so I am noting that and putting in an enforcement request on those.

My main hope remains invalid contract for the fine in that they should only be allowed to charge after two free hours but that requires getting the contract between VCS and the landowner and as I don't even know who the landowner is I'm a bit stumped on that one.

Again I'd really appreciate any help or insight regarding these points.

mkv123

D_P_Dance said:

Read this

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6116701/let-us-ignore-all-pcns-not-for-milquetoasts/p1

I understand your point but I'd rather sort this out as soon as possible and I have seen VCS uphold the £100 over £60 charge when there have been reasonable delays to responses including appeals. Also the advice on that thread isn't conclusive no?

KeithP

This car park crops up often here.

Use the forum search facility with Berkeley Precinct and you will find over one hundred posts mentioning it.

D_P_Dance

 Also the advice on that thread isn't conclusive no?

Agreed, but when the courts get back to normal there will be hundreds of eviction/rental arrears cases,which are causing landlords genuine hardship, to o hear before these fake BOC claims.  

Coupon-mad

they have changed all the signage to make it clear (as far as I can tell which I somehow didn't notice) so previous threads about this are no longer accurate. 

Yes they are, because if a driver like you did not have the unexpected change brought to their attention prominently on signage, then they have failed to meet the Code of Practice and failed to meet the CRA 2015 rules about prominence and transparency of terms, and failed to meet the high bar set in Spurling v Bradshaw (see Lord Denning's words about the 'red hand with a red arrow pointing to it').

The deadline I can pay £60 in is the 25th of March and I really don't want to have to pay more than this so I'd really appreciate any quick advice.

May I say it's pointless posting here then.  If you are really the kind of person who is up for supporting the scam and funding the next PCNs to the tune of £60 (for an easy life) rather than fighting it and paying nothing (risking no CCJ and no huge costs) then you are in the wrong place.

My main point is, from my understanding, it only makes sense to challenge these parking tickets when they are actually wrong as opposed to blatantly parking on someone else's land (so you will win in court).

Wrong.  that's where people go completely wrong.  What did CEC16's case in Southampton get won on - you need to read it (nothing to do with the retail park or what happened).  What is the main thrust of the current template defence (search the forum and read it)?  Why are so many Judges striking out parking cases left, right and centre?