Letter Before Claim - VCS

blakbruker

The Registered Keeper has received a Letter Before Claim from VCS regarding an alleged parking charge in March 2017. The RK feels a bit uneasy with the issue of going to court as they weren't the driver of the car at the time of the incident. However, no decision has been made yet so some advice would be welcome on how to proceed. Would the RK have any course to reveal the driver at the time or has that ship sailed? What would be the repercussions of revealing the driver?
If the RK is left with no other options than to pay the charge or go to the court hearing, then after catching up with developments on this forum can they clarify a couple of points:
Has it now been established that the myparkingcharge "notices" have been declared to have in fact been declared NtD's contrary to what VCS claim? Would this help in defence or would it not as it hadn't been declared a NtD at the time?
The amount demanded states £160 including a £60 debt collection charge. Is it now established that this additional charge is not legal and can be used as Abuse of Process? Would this mean that if the case was lost the RK would have to pay the £100?

Redx

See the second post of the newbies FAQ sticky thread near the top of the forum for LBC issues

VCS will have failed the law named POFA so a keeper has no liability , does not have to name the driver and no issues due to not naming them

In short , the Keeper will win on a technicality and the law named POFA , so no money is owed

If the keeper did name the driver before any court claim , VCS would take the driver to court and POFA does not apply to the driver, a driver can always be held liable for their own actions

blakbruker

Thanks Redx, the thread for LBC has been read. So if the RK named the driver would that revert back to the initial stage with the driver receiving the initial charge? The driver acknowledges that they are liable but cannot ask the RK to go ahead with something they aren't comfortable with. I've read that only the defendant can attend a hearing, is that correct? 

With regards to the NtD, have these been proven/stated by DVLA to be a NtD and does this help with the POFA?

Redx

The keeper can name the driver , name and serviceable address , to VCS , keeping copies as proof , the keeper has always had this opportunity , but loses it once a court claim is issued

VCS must then pursue the driver , including court if necessary , within 6 years , where the driver is the defendant

The defendant must attend court if a face to face hearing happens , but other people can also attend with them , as lay rep or as witnesses , so several people can attend if required so you are wrong there

You can ask the DVLA about if the my parking charge paper is classed as an ntd , I believe that it's not and I believe they have said so , a judge may decide differently however

POFA does not apply to a driver , which I stated earlier

I also told you that VCS papers are not POFA compliant , never have been

blakbruker

Thanks again Redx. I understand POFA doesn't apply to the driver, the RK and driver are looking at 2 options, defend in court or name the driver (to relieve the pressure on the RK) which both are aware would mean the driver paying. Thanks for the advice on who can attend, another site said it may be possible but up to the judge to decide if they can be heard. When this all started the hope with POFA non-compliance was based on the NtD as if it wasn't an NtD then they abided by the rules as far as I can tell (very well may be wrong) DVLA were contacted at the time about the myparkingcharge notice but never responded. I've read threads where VCS and others have changed this notice.

Redx

Only the keeper can decide , but I can assure you that the VCS ntd and also the VCS ntk didn't abide by POFA at all , so a Keeper who was not the driver has nothing to fear , it's when a keeper was also the driver that problems arise and that is the usual stance taken by VCS

There are no rules , so no idea what rules you are talking about

There is contract law , so law , not rules

There is POFA , again a law , so not rules

There is the CRA , a law , so not rules

There is the IPC CoP , a code of practice 

It's an unregulated industry , meaning no rules apply , yet

The rules will arrive in the new Parking CoP once the Mhclg get on with it

I agree that a judge may not allow people to be heard , but you talked about attendance , people can attend , but being heard is different altogether

Umkomaas

VCS will find any court case against the keeper much more difficult to win than one against the driver. But your option to throw the driver under the bus remains until such time as you receive a formal court claim from the Northampton CCBC. 

beamerguy

The amount demanded states £160 including a £60 debt collection charge. Is it now established that this additional charge is not legal and can be used as Abuse of Process? Would this mean that if the case was lost the RK would have to pay the £100?

The VCS scam of adding £60.   As the courts call this abuse of process, it taints the claim making it unreliable and prime to be struck out and you to claim costs from VCS.
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6014081/abuse-of-process-district-judge-tells-bwlegal/p1?new=1

Redx

A typical loss in court is say £200 or less

£100 plus the legal fees including court fees if it goes to county court

A win in court means claiming your own costs , lots of info about this has been posted on here in other threads , including some where Umkomaas has given the breakdown numerous times

Ralph-y

has the keeper been watching to much TV?  worried about court

what is the court like ...
 Have a look at this short video:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=n93eoaxhzpU

Ralph

Coupon-mad

So if the RK named the driver would that revert back to the initial stage with the driver receiving the initial charge? 

Nope, not with VCS.

Has it now been established that the myparkingcharge "notices" have been declared to have in fact been declared NtD's contrary to what VCS claim?

Read the thread by @adambuzz14 and believe us, the keeper is not liable.  Don't switch liability to the driver in your case!

 However, the keeper should respond and say that they were not the driver but will defend the case as keeper and exercise their right not to name the driver, and they will rely on the POFA and the fact VCS were using a 'red card on the windscreen' false document trail, that misleads the public, breaches the POFA has since been banned by both ATAs and the DVLA.