Vehicle Control Services, No stopping in a queue...

Snakes_Belly

Taken from Indeed. A website for employees, ex/employees to rate and comment on their employer/ex employer.

"If your desperate for work use it until a better job comes your way , this company is about making money out of peoples parking mistakes with the minimum signage & minimum legal requirement size of lettering , they pressure you to book people just for numbers then they sift through the video footage and pick what they think can use to send out fix penalty notices to unsuspecting public"

When threatened with court, CCJ's, bailiffs, not being able to obtain finance and affecting employment many people will just pay up. It is like a protection racket.

Castle

Your post at 1.42pm on 9th August suggests that it will actually be a telephone hearing; so there won't be any "little chats" before hand. 
However don't be surprised if VCS "forget" to organise the telephone conference call; or have nobody available to take part.

Fruitcake

The (poor quality) photos show a car stopped in a queue with someone stood by an open rear door. They could be a passenger or a bystander. Your narrative as to why there was someone stood by the car will be key to your defence.

You haven't shown us the photos from their WS so it is impossible to compare them and comment on what they infer, or what they don't show.
I would like to have seen Yasmeen's signature in the WS as I have a suspicion she might be another Jack Jackman whose signature is always identical down to the last pixel, but that hasn't been shown.
There may also be other bits of useful information in the parts of the WS that you haven't shown us.

Of course, there may be nothing of significance at all in the rest of the WS, but we won't know that if we never see it. I know it's a pain in the backside to copy and show it, but the devil is in the detail.

Fruitcake

As far as I can tell, the car in the four photos above is at the car park entrance shown dead centre of the first and third aerial photos of the site plan in the contract.
If this is the case then you are correct that the red line drawn on that map goes along the main service road and does not cover the 50m or so of the car park entrance road. 
The scammers do not seem to have marked the position of the car on any map to prove it is within the area they are contracted to scam, unless that is in a part of the WS you haven't shown us.
I suggest you enlarge the two aerial photos and mark the position of the car on it to show it is (just) outside their contracted area, then send it in as part of your WS or supplementary WS. 

ginger_bread_man

Interesting point about the vehicle being in the middle of the road, I had not thought of that!

That is also correct about the location, I will do that and include a marked enlarged aerial view.

Here is Yasmeen's Sig, the remaining photos - none of which are of the material location, and the 3 cctv stills they chose from the 7 posted above. (VCS PHOTOS)  I'll attach their witness statement and site contract here so that hopefully makes more sense to anyone looking back at this.  In addition to this in their bundle was my defence, and copies of all letters they had sent me in the post, but no copies of email correspondence or anything I had sent to them, that's all.

Umkomaas

That's the old (pre-March 2020) Statement of Truth. A paralegal must know that by now. I'm sure the signature is a facsimile - please search the forum on 'VCS Witness Statement' and 'Yasmeen Couser Witness Statement' and check - it looks identical to others and shown at a funny angle and not where a physical signature would normally be placed. 

Fruitcake

Spot the difference.

From this case at Bristol Airport.



Last month when she was a paralegal for a different company where she has been also working since January 2018.



One from a week before that.



Unfortunately they were not all scanned on a standard A4 copier so they cannot be overlaid exactly, but if you draw a straight line from the dot after the Y to the bottom tail of the signature, it always just touches the bottom of the letter "o".

Surprisingly, none of the above look anything like her electronic version of her siggy.

Snakes_Belly

Interesting case on Pepipoo regarding Yasmeen Couser and a WS.
http://forums.pepipoo.com/lofiversion/index.php/t127209.html

Snakes_Belly

Yasmeen could have been furloughed. I would imagine that SRS is taking advantage of the scheme.

The photo's taken on 22nd from VCS's  witness statement I assume are to show that there are some signs. 

On the other photographs you can see the brake lights on your car in the queue. I think if you were dropping someone off the natural instinct would be to indicate and pull over. Your car is in a traffic queue and in the middle of the road. There is no way that you could avoid stopping.  You could not meet the terms of the signage. Not sure whether this would be frustration of contract, maybe. 

Fruitcake

In no particular order we have: -

The vehicle was not stopped in an area controlled by the scammers as shown in their own evidence. I would suggest this is attempting to obtain money by deception.
I would suggest that Yasmeen cannot possibly have witnessed the alleged event and therefore her comments cannot be true as they are outwith her knowledge.
The vehicle was not stopped for the purpose alleged by the scammers.
The WS has been signed by a paralegal who has not used the correct and current statement of truth.
The WS signature looks suspiciously like a photocopy, not an actual wet ink siggy. (Oh gawds, please don't let people think I am one of the FMOTL brethren). Even if Yasmeen has been furloughed, there is no reason why she cannot be party to a remote hearing by 'phone. I would complain to the judge that you are being disadvantaged if you are not allowed to question her. 
Abuse of process.

I actually live under the flight path of Brizzle airport and know it very well. Sadly I am unable to visit it at the moment otherwise I would offer to go (on foot) and take piccies, although I actually think you have enough evidence to win this anyway.