VCS Small Claims Stage - Residential visitor

aa92

Hi guys, 

Background: Vehicle in question was parked at a friends premises (block of flats with underground parking) - the car was parked for a total of 10 days, in the same spot, whilst we were out of the country. We placed visitor permits in the dashboard of the car, for every single day that the car was parked however (stupidly) we forgot to enter the registration number on each of the permits (hand written permits). 

VCS ticketed the car (I believe three in total - 3 postal NTKs were received, they also left tickets on the car itself). 
This all happened 2 years ago. I remember my friend (who's place I was parked at) wrote to them explaining the situation however they refused to cancel the charges.
There was no POPLA appeal made etc, unfortunately. 

Looking on the VCS website, only one of the NTKs loads up to view images taken - this is not the one that corresponds to the numbers of the PCN that are being contested in court (does this help?). The images they have taken show very clearly permits for everyday that the car was parked, with a blank space in the registration box. 

Current: I have received two claims in the small claims court relating to the above. Both AOS have been submitted. I need to submit the defence by Wednesday and am just in the process of writing this out. 

I would massively appreciate any advice in terms of how to succinctly relay the fact that permits were in the car, however due to an oversight the reg number was not filled in, however the car was in the same spot the whole time and clearly there was no wrong-doing for example by using the blank permits for other cars or such alike. 

Many thanks in advance!

Redx

VCS do not subscribe to the BPA AOS , so Popla was never on the table !!  Never !!

Post the issue date from the claim form below , and date of the AOS acknowledgement too

Adapt the template defence by coupon mad from the announcements up top

Word paragraphs 2 and 3 accordingly , as a draft , showing us your efforts so far , for feedback

Also include asking the court to consolidate both claims into one

Email a SAR to the DPO at VCS attaching a copy of the claim forms , to obtain all your data too

aa92

Thank you! 

Issue date: 28th May
AOS was received 16th June

Currently adapting the defence and will share here shortly. 

Further to add to the story: 
Date of notice on windscreen is 8th June and 10th June. 
Date of corresponding NTK is 14th June and 18th June.

3rd July: Direct appeal to VCS was submitted online via their website form, by my friend whos flat I was parked at, explaining that he was driver at the time. 

9th August: letter received by me from VCS, stating receipt of correspondence regarding the ticket, but not receipt of authority from me for the other person to act on my behalf. 

-> I subsequently sent a letter by post to VCS explaining that my friend had use of the vehicle at the material time and that I give full authority for him to deal with the matter going forward. 

2nd September and 10th September: letter received by me from VCS informing that they are unable to accept the appeal. All further correspondence has been to me (despite me giving permission for all correspondence to go to my friend). 

Not sure if this changes anything and may help shape what I should include in the defence?

Redx

Yes it does if you named the driver , with their address , because POFA allows it

There should be no keeper liability if the Keeper was not the driver , due to VCS never complying with POFA

So these valid points need weaving into paragraph 3 , and paragraph 2 should state keeper but not the driver , if true

KeithP

You are right with your Defence filing deadline.

With a Claim Issue Date of 28th May, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Wednesday 30th June 2021 to file your Defence.

That's just two days away but plenty of time to produce a Defence.

To create a Defence, and then file a Defence by email, look at the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Don't miss the deadline for filing a Defence.

aa92

Draft of defence: 

2.       It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question but liability is denied. The Defendant was not the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged event.

3.  The Defendant cannot be held liable due to the Claimant failing to comply with keeper liability requirements as set out in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4. A submission was entered by the driver of the vehicle on the 3rd of July 2019 via the Claimants online service. Subsequently the Claimant acknowledges receipt of notice on the 24th of August 2019 issued to the Claimant providing details, including the serviceable address of the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged event. This notice further provided full authority for future correspondence to be directed to the driver. Despite this, the Claimant has ignored this instruction and continues to pursue the Defendant.
Reviewing the photographic evidence provided, the vehicle was parked with clearly displayed permits visible through the front windscreen, corresponding to each day that the vehicle was parked. Through error, the registration number per permit was omitted, however the Claimant has failed to take this into account during previous appeals and is seeking unfair charges.

KeithP

I would leave out the last sentence of your para 3.
It is for the Claimant to prove their case - no need to do their job for them.

Coupon-mad

100% agree.

aa92

Just wanted to check by last sentence you mean to remove only: 

“Through error, the registration number per permit was omitted, however the Claimant has failed to take this into account during previous appeals and is seeking unfair charges.”

This error was obviously on my part and the reason why I’m in this situation! 

KeithP

aa92 said:

Just wanted to check by last sentence you mean to remove only: 

“Through error, the registration number per permit was omitted, however the Claimant has failed to take this into account during previous appeals and is seeking unfair charges.”

This error was obviously on my part and the reason why I’m in this situation! 

Yes, that's exactly what I mean.

And I told you why I would do that...

It is for the Claimant to prove their case - no need to do their job for them.

aa92

KeithP said:

aa92 said:

Yes, that's exactly what I mean.

And I told you why I would do that...

It is for the Claimant to prove their case - no need to do their job for them.

Perfect thank you KeithP, and Couponmad. Will submit this first thing tomorrow morning!