I WON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Grimghast

Umkomaas said:

'The principle debt'?  They can't even use the correct term!

It looks like a formal 'Letter of Claim', so it needs to be dealt with it as per the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, second post. 

Why can't your friend post here?

You still haven't responded to the above ....

They're not internet savvy old technophobes lol
thanks for the advice and clarifying what this letter actually is (I had no idea thought it was another debt collectors letter) baack to the newbies faq I shall go!

beamerguy

You really must get your friend to continue on this thread, unless of course you are your friend ?

VCS think you (both) are a mug.  So, we can explain the VCS scam but will the real person stand up ?

Grimghast

beamerguy said:

You really must get your friend to continue on this thread, unless of course you are your friend ?

VCS think you (both) are a mug.  So, we can explain the VCS scam but will the real person stand up ?

one of the first things i read was dont reveal the identity of the driver and the parking people look at these forums :P 
so forgive me for being a bit cagey lol

MistyZ

Grimghast said:

beamerguy said:

You really must get your friend to continue on this thread, unless of course you are your friend ?

VCS think you (both) are a mug.  So, we can explain the VCS scam but will the real person stand up ?

The Registered Keeper of the vehicle received the PCN.   They may or may not have been the driver.  I'd suggest editing the second line of the opening post to say that the ticket was received while 'it' (the car) was parked if you want to ensure there are no hints at who the driver may have been.   This friend - they're the RK, is that correct?  So they have nothing to lose by coming here.

This is at a serious stage so you / they don't want to mess around and everything needs to be accurate.

Grimghast

So 
Ive sent the company a SAR and emailed their litigation department saying I dispute the debt as per the newbies thread, I received an automated response from the litigation deepartment saying they aim to deal with my request within 28 days.
Is that all I do at this stage? nebies thread says dont send the reply form? the form says I have o return it within 30 days or they will issue court proceedings? not sure if theres anything else I do at this stage or is it just a case to wait for their response now?
Yes Im the RK not my friend :P sorry for being so cagey lol
Ps I've no fear over ggoing all the way to court with this just want to make sure I do everything by the book and not give these scamming gits a penny of my hard earned cash!! 

blakbruker

This LBC is identical to the one I'm helping a RK deal with and suddenly many more of these online it appears. Seems they're using the current lockdown situation to their advantage, wonder if it's due to telephone hearings being less costly for them?
FWIW the RK keeper in the case I'm helping with has sent their SAR and is writing the first LBC reply in this thread: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4754020/parking-letter-before-county-court-claim-lbccc-fight-back-guidance-thread/p1
I've been advised not to return the forms and am taking that advice. Confident that VCS will have not abided by POFA and also the additonal £60 for debt recovery not being allowed and being an abuse of process. There's loads of VCS cases to read on here and all I've read that have reached a conclussion have been a happy one!

Grimghast

ye I think abuse of process is where i'll be taking my case
the link you shared though goes to a very old post I believe not sure if all the info in it is still relevant?

Grimghast

Im just not sure if requesting the Sar and emailing the litigation department counts as responding to the LBC?

nosferatu1001

Sending a sar is not a lbc response. 

You tell them , in your response, that  you deny the debt for short set of reasons, and you're seeking debt advice

beamerguy

Grimghast said:

ye I think abuse of process is where i'll be taking my case
the link you shared though goes to a very old post I believe not sure if all the info in it is still relevant?

Abuse of process is not always a winner as a judge could deduct from the claim.

Abuse of process is a tool to use which done properly can result in the judge giving VCS a good spanking and striking out the whole claim.
READ CAREFULLY THESE TWO THREADS, TAKE YOUR TIME
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6014081/abuse-of-process-district-judge-tells-bwlegal/p1?new=1

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6103933/abuse-of-process-thread-part-2/p1?new=1
 
Read what happens to VCS. Learn from these and other cases.
VCS has already tainted their claim by adding the fake £60 which is reason enough to ask the court to consider striking it out as it's clearly unreliable  

If they carry on and take it to court, they have a big hurdle to jump 
As of April 6th 2020 there is a new Civil Procedure rule that states for those signing Witness statements ...... "For witness statements, the statement of truth’s wording will be as follows:
I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth."

Such statements from VCS are normally signed by Jake Burgess.
As the fake £60 is unlawful, what will Jake say ???
So, in your reply to the LBC, ask VCS what is their legal authority to add £60.  As they have no legal authority they can only lie. 

That then nicely fits in when you state their claim is unreliable