VCS Bristol Airport - LBC Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited

Coupon-mad

I'd have added the site should be operated under the byelaws and not pretending to be private land.  That is twisting the law.

Do comment about this when you see the new Code of Practice out for public comments soon.

cathcartzigel

Umkomaas said:

DoaM said:

Did the VCS appeal rejection come to you by post or email? If by email then they're probably blissfully unaware that you're not the RK ... you're naively assuming that they even read your appeal. If it was an email rejection then any further written communication will go to the RK. If it was a postal reply then you may have hooked this away from the RK (and saved your relationship).  

 

I'm still awaiting the VCS appeal rejection as only submitted the appeal yesterday.  But expecting a rejection so getting my ducks in a row.  

Umkomaas said:

Are VCS corresponding directly with you now?  Have they issued a formal 'Notice to Keeper' to you?

Horse to water ......!

Not yet as I'm still awaiting an appeal response and the Notice to Keeper was sent to the registered keeper who is not me.  

cathcartzigel

Coupon-mad said:

Are you a hirer then?  Company car? Rented?

Or was the registered keeper a family member and you wanted to keep them out of it?

The last one - registered keeper is a family member and wanted to keep them out of it.  

Le_Kirk

How do you propose to "keep the family member out of it"?  You have not received the PCN, presumably they have.  The only way to do this is for the family member, the registered keeper and the one who has received the PCN to use the part of the form to "name the driver" and give the PPC your name and address for service, you will then receive a Notice of your own.

Umkomaas

Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (Schedule 4) the registered keeper has far more protection than a driver and especially so on an airport site covered by bylaws. The best way forward is to do everything in the name of the RK, set up a throwaway Gmail address so you receive and deal with any correspondence, but always in the name of the RK. The RK need not see anything unless/until it gets to court. 

If the PPC won't deal with you as the day-to-day keeper, there is little alternative without the loss of current precious protection.  

cathcartzigel

Umkomaas said:

Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (Schedule 4) the registered keeper has far more protection than a driver and especially so on an airport site covered by bylaws. The best way forward is to do everything in the name of the RK, set up a throwaway Gmail address so you receive and deal with any correspondence, but always in the name of the RK. The RK need not see anything unless/until it gets to court. 

If the PPC won't deal with you as the day-to-day keeper, there is little alternative without the loss of current precious protection.  

I am concerned that if this gets to court - which it seems likely  from what I have read on other treads about  VCS v Bristol airport  - the RG will have a fit.  The RG def does not want the hassle of going to court so I feel stuck really.  

Fruitcake

If you are absolutely sure the car was stopped outside the red line shown on the scammer's maps, then naming the driver shouldn't be fatal.
There is a possibility I suppose that you could do as advised by Umkomaas and, dare I say it, make an IAS appeal. You would have to go through their process and rebut everything and prove your point at every step, and even then you might lose, but the driver could be named at that point if the appeal is not upheld.
If you do consider an IAS appeal, then make sure you do not agree to the one where you have to pay £15 and the result IS binding on the motorist. The free version IS NOT binding on the motorist.

I suggest you try to drag everything out until we see what happens in ginger_bread_man's case in court. A court win for stopping in the same place would greatly help your case.

I suggest you also complain again to Bristol Airport, but ensuring you show that the scammers scammed you outside the area where they are contracted to scam. Also point out that since byelaws apply, the scammers cannot pursue the keeper or registered keeper, only the driver or owner, so they (the Airport) should instruct their contractor to follow the law and only pursue said driver or owner, not the keeper or registered keeper. Post your draft complain here if you wish. 

Do make the complaints to the DVLA as well, with proof that the car was stopped outside the scammer's scamzone.

nosferatu1001

Name yourself as the Keeper, surely. 
I dont understand why that is not possible. The RK is only presumed to be the keeper. They dont have to be, and very often are not, so this is not unusual. The RK names you as keeper, with name and serviceable address, and their involvement is done. 

Coupon-mad

Also ask them why they are not implementing the byelaws and on what legal basis do they think they can offer contract law as an alternative on Airport roadways.  

I suggest the above for good reasons. Get it in writing that your raised this...

cathcartzigel

As expected, the appeal to VCS was rejected and I received notification of this today.  I am still unclear about 'keeper' and 'registered keeper' distinction.  The VCS letter contains the following:
"In your appeal it its unclear who the driver was when your vehicle was seen to be stopped on the access road.  It is important we highlight that we will continue to pursue this matter on the reasonable assumption that you were the driver of the vehicle on the date in question until information/evidence to the contrary is provided".
I have considered my options re IAS appeal (I have read the newbies thread about this but hear me out!).  I note from the IAS Annual Report 2018 - 2019 that "20% of all appeals to the IAS (Standard and Non-Standard Appeals) were discontinued by the operators resulting in a positive outcome for motorists".  Given the recent outcome from ginger-bread-man at the same location and I am pondering whether VCS might choose to discontinue with the process if I go down the IAS route.  Unfortunately there is no breakdown by operator so hard to know whether VCS discontinued any at all so welcome thoughts on this.  Happy to tough it out in court if it's deemed by more experienced users to go down that route.