Defence - VCS & Elms Claim

Redx

2 implies that the keeper was also the driver , as well as being the defendant

So 2 should say

keeper and driver

If true , it should do so to avoid being asked in court , where a truthful answer puts an end to it anyway , so either you were , or weren't , or cannot remember or don't know

Snakes_Belly

"Sorry Madam Snake, I disagree .... a small set up in an office as exposed by BBC Watchdog."

Just to clarify BG.  VCS and Excel are much more litigious than the average person/firm who brings a small claim to court. So why wait nearly six years? Because they are trying their luck that the motorist will pay up. This is likely to be pulled at the last minute after the defendant has put in all the work. 

If I felt I had a strong case I would be tempted to counterclaim. 

Castle

Snakes_Belly said:

"Sorry Madam Snake, I disagree .... a small set up in an office as exposed by BBC Watchdog."

Just to clarify BG.  VCS and Excel are much more litigious than the average person/firm who brings a small claim to court. So why wait nearly six years? Because they are trying their luck that the motorist will pay up. This is likely to be pulled at the last minute after the defendant has put in all the work. 

If I felt I had a strong case I would be tempted to counterclaim. 

More likely, hoping the "Defendant" has moved and 6 years interest at 8% plus "fake" charges, soon add up.

D_P_Dance

You can always threaten to counter claim, it may focus their minds 

Snakes_Belly

Castle said:

Snakes_Belly said:

"Sorry Madam Snake, I disagree .... a small set up in an office as exposed by BBC Watchdog."

Just to clarify BG.  VCS and Excel are much more litigious than the average person/firm who brings a small claim to court. So why wait nearly six years? Because they are trying their luck that the motorist will pay up. This is likely to be pulled at the last minute after the defendant has put in all the work. 

If I felt I had a strong case I would be tempted to counterclaim. 

More likely, hoping the "Defendant" has moved and 6 years interest at 8% plus "fake" charges, soon add up.

Yes, because it would be easy pickings for them and the defendant would end up with a CCJ that they did not know about. They are so low.  

beamerguy

Whilst the new CoP will hurt the SRS group, their worst enemy will be the new independent appeals service which will scupper a high number of their tickets.  

Councils are very careful because the next step is the TPT who are very fair.

The SRS group will lose the protection of the IAS and their downfall will commence

Snakes_Belly

beamerguy said:

Whilst the new CoP will hurt the SRS group, their worst enemy will be the new independent appeals service which will scupper a high number of their tickets.  

Councils are very careful because the next step is the TPT who are very fair.

The SRS group will lose the protection of the IAS and their downfall will commence

If the single appeals service takes into account mitigating circumstances then it will knock a lot out. We see a lot of mitigating circumstances on the board. I did notice in the comments to the Public Consultation that the PPC trolls did not want mitigating circumstances to be taken into account. No surprise there.

Coupon-mad

A lot will depend on who wins the contract to run the Appeals Service.  

beamerguy

Snakes_Belly said:

beamerguy said:

Whilst the new CoP will hurt the SRS group, their worst enemy will be the new independent appeals service which will scupper a high number of their tickets.  

Councils are very careful because the next step is the TPT who are very fair.

The SRS group will lose the protection of the IAS and their downfall will commence

If the single appeals service takes into account mitigating circumstances then it will knock a lot out. We see a lot of mitigating circumstances on the board. I did notice in the comments to the Public Consultation that the PPC trolls did not want mitigating circumstances to be taken into account. No surprise there.

They won't get their way on that, If it's run like the TPT
Remember this ....... WATCHDOG on Parking Eye and double dipping ANPR
You will see Andrew Pester, the CEO of the BPA .... wondering what to say next and fluffing around.   Did the BBC give him a glass of soap and water to flush his mouth out afterwards ?

He wants an independent appeals service ? not what the parking scammers want

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIaKMkO3YVM&ab_channel=tizrovideo 

And then we had the upskirt BPA guy (Troy) and the DVLA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlPjpW_6pGc&t=460s&ab_channel=taffy056

NO WONDER THE BPA ARE RUNNING SCARED

Snakes_Belly

A single appeal's service could monitor how many appeals a motorist is making. 

The LA's in Staffordshire for minor infringements such as a disabled badge or ticket falling off the windsceen will cancel the ticket but warn the motorist that it is a one off.