Claim Form received - VCS - WON - For the second time!

Redx

well done , VCS and JB lose yet again!!

Another one bites the dust !!

Umkomaas

I really don't understand VCS not bothering about going on the call or providing phone details 

Simple - they are too afraid of being asked to answer difficult, possibly incriminating, questions. They never turn up, even though they reputedly employ a CILEX-qualified staff member. Take a bow Joke Burgess!

Coupon-mad

lyndonp59 said:

Well today was the day.

The call was supposed to be at High Noon (quite appropriate for a showdown with VCS!) but it didn't come until after 12:10pm. We had District Judge Heppell who seemed a very decent guy and put me at ease straight away. He had all the info my son had sent to court and knew I was to be the Lay Rep on the same phone number and was quite OK with that. He went on to say that VCS weren't on the call as they had not provided  a phone number and had not been in contact with the court today, which I initially thought great, he'll dismiss it, but he said that he would take their case on their papers which concerned me a little especially when he said that just because we didn't agree with his final decision it wasn't a reason to appeal.

He started the recording at 12:14 and it was all over in under 10 minutes....case dismissed! I was phoning my wife at 12:26!

So the actual hearing:-

• I started off with the issue of VCS filing their WS a week late and actually dated 2 days after the submisison deadline, after we had written to the court asking for them to strike it out. (detail in previous posts). He understood but wasn't going to strike it out, but maybe with that and the fact they hadn't provided a phone number as requested would have made him question VCS's integrity in this matter(?)

• He then asked what we had to say. I said that throughout this 5 and half years VCS had stated the breach was 19 minutes over the 2 hours allowed but never acknowledged the grace period allowed. At this point he said he understood they were normally 10 minutes and therefore it was 9 minutes over. I then went on to explain the fact in the ICP CoP there were two grace periods allowed, entry where you park and read the signs and one on exit. I pointed him to the entrance photo in the WS which clearly shows “Any vehicle/driver remaining in this car park 10 minutes after entry is subject to and agrees in full to the Terms and Conditions”, therefore the 2 hours in the T&Cs starts after that 10 minutes.
  
• He was asking at this point if I was saying that signage shown in their WS was not the actual signage and I asked if I could come onto the signage issue afterwards and I explained again directing him to the specific exhibit where it is shown about the initial 10 minutes.
  

• Straight away he came back and said even he could work that out, 10+10 =20 which is more than the 19, and I think he then said being as VCS aren't present to argue it, case dismissed!

• Pretty chuffed at this point! He then asked if we had anything else to add, where I brought up costs. He said what I expected him to say, that they can only be awarded for unreasonable behaviour. I then said my son had had to take time off work for the hearing and he asked how much was I proposing and I said £95. There was a pause which I thought he might counter with something lower but he came back and said he thought that £95 attendance allowance was reasonable. Result!

• Even if VCS were there to argue the entry grace period I was going to use "contra proferentem" as the persuasive point in our favour.

So we never got onto the signage I also had lined up and all sorts of other issues like the contract where I had a document from VCS obtained by SAR that was signed by their employee saying they did not have a contract to issue PCNs (on an earlier post)

Hopefully VCS won't appeal.

So even though this won it on the initial grace period argument, I would never have done the Defence and WS with all the additional points I didn't need to use in the end without help on here, which also gave me confidence in handling it, so I would like to offer my sincere thanks to all that have helped, especially C-M, as I couldn't have done it without your input, help and information on here.

Must say, it would have been interesting to see what his views were on the other points on signage, abuse of process, contract etc.

I really don't understand VCS not bothering about going on the call or providing phone details but I won't lose any sleep over them.To be honest I actually thought they might send a discontinue letter this week but glad they didn't now!

Brilliant - very well done!  

YET ANOTHER VCS ONE BITES THE DUST!  DON'T YOU JUST LOVE IT WHEN THE EX-CLAMPER FIRMS LOSE.  THEY NEVER LEARN.

Snakes_Belly

Well done on you and your son's win .  

D_P_Dance

VCS   have wasted your time, now consider how you can waste theirs, read this,

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

Le_Kirk

Well done on the win.  Like you and other regulars I am concerned that judges seem to give more leeway to "so-called" professionals who cannot get WSs in on time, fail to abide by court orders and do not give phone numbers for a phone hearing.  If that had been you, I guarantee the claimant would have been awarded the case; we've read some on here!

lyndonp59

beamerguy said:

Well done, seems like VCS zapped themselves

But hey, no reason for the judge to mention the fake £60, his mind was already made up.
What with BWLegal complaining about judges and VCS/EXCEL and Renshaw-smith the boss, doing the same especially when he said a judge was not fit for purpose a while back, the lesson still has not been learned ....... You don't bite the hand you want to feed you"

So we know the Renshaw-smith organisation is down 80% and to add to their woes, another £95  leaves their side. With national lockdown affecting the VCS favourite haunts, the advice must be for Renshaw-smith, .... stop wasting your money on stupid claims, not going to work any more

How much do they actually shell out on lost cases such as this example? There is the £95, cost of DVLA for registered keeper details, £25 court fee. Are there any other costs they have to pay or have paid? (the more the better! )

Umkomaas

lyndonp59 said:

beamerguy said:

Well done, seems like VCS zapped themselves

But hey, no reason for the judge to mention the fake £60, his mind was already made up.
What with BWLegal complaining about judges and VCS/EXCEL and Renshaw-smith the boss, doing the same especially when he said a judge was not fit for purpose a while back, the lesson still has not been learned ....... You don't bite the hand you want to feed you"

So we know the Renshaw-smith organisation is down 80% and to add to their woes, another £95  leaves their side. With national lockdown affecting the VCS favourite haunts, the advice must be for Renshaw-smith, .... stop wasting your money on stupid claims, not going to work any more

How much do they actually shell out on lost cases such as this example? There is the £95, cost of DVLA for registered keeper details, £25 court fee. Are there any other costs they have to pay or have paid? (the more the better! )

You have to see the bigger picture here. While they will have shelled out a few bob to you as a result of your win, I bet there will be up to 50 others who will have reached for the chequebooks in utter fear and paid them their £160. Not a bad business model if you can generate £160 for a £25 court filing fee. 

Wish I could find something as lucrative (via a legitimate business venture!!). I could then be sailing the high seas with SRS in our yachts. 

Snakes_Belly

"How much do they actually shell out on lost cases such as this example? There is the £95, cost of DVLA for registered keeper details, £25 court fee. Are there any other costs they have to pay or have paid? (the more the better! "

If they use a representative such as Elms it can work out to around £125.00 per hour plus vat. If two hours have been allocated the rep gets paid for two hours even if the case lasts only 10 mins. 

lyndonp59

Redx said:

well done , VCS and JB lose yet again!!

Another one bites the dust !!

Is JB still there, he has been conspicuous by his absence on letters recently? Maybe he has got the old heave-ho for losing too mnay cases he is pushing to court!

What annoys me the most is that clearly there is a 20 minute grace period (10 before, 10 after) but VCS fail to acknowledge this on all their letters and indeed WS. They always say, as in this instance, 19 minutes over the 2 hours. I just wonder how many people pay up or lose in court not realising they have been within the 20 minute grace periods.

I was prepared that if VCS had turned up and argued the point about the 10 minutes entry not being additional to the 2 hours I was going to quote "contra proferentem" to them.