VCS - Flora Street, Sheffield

Priapic

Hi everyone,

I've been posting on pepipoo (hxxp://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=137354), but found that there were more threads similar to my situation on here, and was hoping for some advice. The charge is for "parking in a restricted area". It seems that several other people have won in court against VCS for this exact situation. I'm currently at the LBC stage and would appreciate your help

The timeline is as follows:
27/11/20 Driver received a "privacy notice" after parking in Flora Street retail park in what they thought was a free space. 
01/12/20 Received NTK. At this point I appealed through VCS' online appeal service. It is worth noting that their system only offers two options - state that you were not the driver and then provide details of the person driving at the time; or state that the charge is invalid and dispute the charge on this basis. Unfortunately, to do this, you must select that you were the driver and so presumably now this, rightly or wrongly, is an admission of being the driver. Their inevitable rejection stated:
"Having considered the points you have raised and reviewed our records, we are unable to accept your appeal. Our main reason(s) for this decision are as follows: The signs at the car park make it clear that the land is private property and that a Charge of £100 will be levied if vehicles park outside of the Terms and Conditions displayed. The signs in proximity to where the above detailed vehicle parked clearly state "Park Only Within the Lines of a Single Marked Bay" the vehicle parked in that Restricted/Prohibited area of the car park and not within the lines of a marked bay therefore you became liable for the Charge advertised. We have fully reviewed this case and we are satisfied that the Charge Notice was correctly issued. We are unable to accept the mitigating circumstances raised in your representations, your appeal is therefore rejected and the charge will stand; photographic evidence which supports this can be viewed at www.myparkingcharge.co.uk"
19/01/21 Demand for Payment
03/02/21 Final Demand
18/02/21 Letter before Claim

Censored images of all of the above are visible here
hxxps://imgur.com/a/aUsjaGk

I have until 20/03/21 to respond. My understanding from the newbie thread is that I should submit an SAR, and give a written response to the LBC stating that I am seeking debt advice, and that their letter is insufficient and request more information. 
My arguments to contest the charge are:

1) The area parked in has no markings designating it as a restricted area. The signage (hxxps://i.imgur.com/6oaXypy.jpg) states 
"No parking in restricted areas; double yellow lines, hatched areas, roadways, pedestrian walkways, entrances or exits", there is no suggestion that the area in question is any of these. There is also the requirement to "park correctly and only between the lines of a single marked bay", which they alluded to in their response to the appeal.
2) Signage is inadequate 
3) Addition of £60 "debt collection charge" constitutes a double recovery, see
hxxps://www.dropbox.com/s/16qovzulab1szem/G4QZ465V%20Excel%20v%20Wilkinson.pdf?dl=0
4) Absence of a grace period - photographs range over a period of 4 minutes and 9 seconds, the BPA Code of Practice (13.4) states that the Grace Period to leave the car park should be a minimum of 10 minutes. There is no grace period mentioned on any of the signs. 

Additionally, there was no NTD given, instead a "privacy notice" was affixed to the car. However, given that I might have scuppered my chances of arguing on keeper liability, is this and non-compliance with PoPLA now not worth pursuing?

In my response, is it worth mentioning any of these arguments?
I'm not quite clear on the significance of the Pre-Action Procedures for Debt Claims - arguing about non-compliance with this seems to have fallen out of fashion around 2017. Is this correct?

I've posted a draft response letter modified from templates I have found on this forum and would appreciate any help - thanks!

Priapic

Dear Sir/Madam,
Reference: XXXXXX
I am in receipt of your Letter Before Claim of 18/02/2021. I deny any debt, but I am seeking debt advice, and the case must be put 'on hold' for not less than 30 days under the PAP for debt claims 2017.
Your letter contains insufficient detail of the claim and fails to provide copies of evidence your client places reliance upon. I have sent your client a SAR, additionally I require your client to comply with pre-action procedures by sending me the following information/documents:
1. What the details of the claim are; where it is claimed the vehicle was parked, for how long,
2. Provide details of the original charge, and detail any interest and administrative or other charges added and how these have been calculated
3. Whether I am being pursued as driver or keeper
4. Is the claim for a contractual breach or trespass? Please provide details
5. Provide me a copy of the contract with the landowner under which they assert authority to bring the claim, as required by the IPC code of practice section B, clause 1.1 “establishing yourself as the creditor”
6. A plan showing where any signs were displayed, as well as:
a. Size of signs
b. Size of font on signage
c. Height at which signs are displayed
7. Provide me a copy of the contract with the landowner under which they assert authority to bring the claim, as required by the IPC code of practice section B, clause 1.1 “establishing yourself as the creditor”

Please treat this letter as a formal request for all of the documents / information that the protocol now requires your client to provide. Your client must not issue proceedings without complying with that protocol.

If your client does not provide me with this information then I put you on notice that I will be relying on the cases of Webb Resolutions Ltd v Waller Needham & Green [2012] EWHC 3529 (Ch), Daejan Investments Limited v The Park West Club Limited (Part 20) – Buxton Associates [2003] EWHC 2872, Charles Church Developments Ltd v Stent Foundations Limited & Peter Dann Limited [2007] EWHC 855 in asking the court to impose sanctions on your client and to order a stay of the proceedings, pursuant to paragraphs 13 ,15(b) and © and 16 of the Practice Direction, as referred to in paragraph 7.2 of the Protocol.

Until your client has complied with its obligations and provided this information, I am unable to respond properly to the alleged claim and to consider my position in relation to it, and it is entirely premature (and a waste of costs and court time) for your client to issue proceedings. Should your client do so, then I will seek an immediate stay pursuant to paragraph 15(b) of the Practice Direction and an order that this information is provided.
Yours Sincerely,

Le_Kirk

I am not sure that posting the same question on two different fora leads to twice the advice (given it is likely to be the same anyway) but could lead to twice the confusion!

Umkomaas

found that there were more threads similar to my situation on here, and was hoping for some advice. The charge is for "parking in a restricted area". It seems that several other people have won in court against VCS for this exact situation.

The chances of receiving any advice from anyone with first-hand experience of court cases, similar to the one you're likely to face, is somewhere between none and zero. 

Almost no one comes back to help anyone else once they've been helped to get off their own charge!  British society at its best.

D_P_Dance

Have you complained to your MP?

Priapic

D_P_Dance said:

Have you complained to your MP?

I haven't yet, no, but will do once this is over. I've contacted the stores who use the car park but have pretty much been stonewalled by them. 

I don't suppose anyone could have a quick look at the letter and let me know if it's alright? 
Thanks

Redx

Your letter seems over the top but no reason why it cannot be sent to the claimant

You need to email a SAR to VCS to their DPO listed on their privacy page , with a copy of the V5C as proof of I D under the GDPR law , if not done already

Lastly , VCS are IPC members yet in your opening post you mention BPA CoP grace periods , not applicable to an IPC member !

1505grandad

Paras 5 and 7 are the same.

Priapic

1505grandad said:

Paras 5 and 7 are the same.

Thanks - just amended.

Redx said:

Your letter seems over the top but no reason why it cannot be sent to the claimant

You need to email a SAR to VCS to their DPO listed on their privacy page , with a copy of the V5C as proof of I D under the GDPR law , if not done already

Lastly , VCS are IPC members yet in your opening post you mention BPA CoP grace periods , not applicable to an IPC member !

Thank you. I've toned it down a bit - having had no experience at this sort of thing I'd just adapted it from templates I found from previous forum posts. Do I need to include at this point my reasons for disputing the claim?
What generally happens now - is the next stage a court claim?

Redx

The golden rules is keep your powder dry , don't tip off the enemy with the contents of your ammunition box

Yes , a court claim pack from the CCBC in Northampton , hence why your SAR and a minor delay in order to get your SAR reply are being advised. There is nothing you can say or do to stop their inexorable process , it's what they do , daily !!  They probably will not read your delaying tactics at all , but may grant a 30 day circuit breaker. The SAR reply is your objective here, to get most of the evidence. You need to obtain most of the rest yourself , such as signage etc

We do not expect newbies to have knowledge or previous experience , otherwise you would know the ropes and wouldn't be asking for advice !! Most of the regulars here have no experience of it either !! I certainly don't. But if you read and research any topic for long enough , you gain knowledge , like with covid19 or pandemics , 18 months ago very few people had knowledge about the topic , apart from watching films and shows like outbreak and contagion etc , whereas now we are all quite knowledgeable on various subjects within the field

You do not need people with experience , although it helps , but don't discount those with knowledge. Some experts haven't suffered with covid19 , but are very knowledgeable on that topic

Priapic

Thanks for everything guys. An update - it seems the case has been passed onto ELMS Legal, and I have received a "Notification of Instruction" from them informing me that VCS have instructed them to recover the debt. Scan is attached. It's a little bit surprising as I was anticipating a court claim and can't find any other forum posts where this letter has been received. Not really sure where this leaves me with next steps - presumably I'm back to square one and have to sit tight while they send me increasingly threatening letters? Still nothing back from the SAR.