liverpool airport and VCS MCOL recieved

ste220

hi guys

i am not sure whether i have played this right from the start, but i have basically ignored all correspondence with VCS. i now have a claim from the county court.

in september 2018 the driver had returned from a few days in majorca and had been parked in the cheap liverpool airport car park. after exiting the car park (by a few meters and still in the exit of carpark/entry to the roundabout "the driver" thought that they had a flat tyre. the driver stepped out of the vehicle for a few seconds to check then continued on their journey. 

i have looked around on here and am unsure how to defend if at all. the claim is a PCN for stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited. the claim is made up of
£160 amount claimed
£35 court fee
£50 legal costs
all totalling £245

i have acknowledged service of the claim only.

at no point have i told anybody who the driver was. 

surely if the driver had a flat tyre and not stopped they would then be in contravention of the RTA with regards to an unroadworthy vehicle?

is a PCN relevent for stopping on a red route?

i am unsure whether at the time signs were shown on the exit from the car park.

thanks

Le_Kirk

You did not play it right, right from the start; ignoring is not an option; well, yes ignore debt collectors but not PCNs or letter before/of claim.  Search the forum for other Liverpool airport threads and see what others have done.  Use the search JLA and VCS.  What is the issue date of your claim form?  If you let us know that then one of the forum regulars will give you some important deadlines and info.

Coupon-mad

Look at the Airport byelaws.  They allow for emergency (safety) stopping.

You seem surprised by the claim and don't seem to have read any other of the HUNDREDS of VCS AIRPORT court threads here, yet?  All won by posters, AFAIK.  We almost always win.

What's the date of issue of the claim?

KeithP

What's the date of issue of the claim?

As well as answering that question, please tell us when you filed an Acknowledgment of Service?
Your MCOL Claim History will have the definitive answer to that.

ste220

the AOS was filed yesterday, 6/12/21 and the issue was 24/11/21. i am of the mindset that obviously i want to win, but cost these chancers as much as possible in the meantime.

KeithP

ste220 said:

the AOS was filed yesterday, 6/12/21 and the issue was 24/11/21.

With a Claim Issue Date of 24th November, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Wednesday 29th December 2021 to file your Defence.

That's over three weeks away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence, but please don't leave it to the last minute.

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.

Do not try and file a Defence via the MoneyClaimOnline website. Once an Acknowledgment of Service has been filed, the MCOL website should be treated as 'read only'.

ste220

thank you for your help, a lot of reading for me there. it is now a matter of principle for me to see VCS off. i will sure be asking advice along the way

95Rollers

In regards for ignoring it 

I would make representations to thr fact you disputed any "debt" and that you believed it was a scam due to it being a contradiction of airport byelaws if this was the case.

They will say that you refused to engage with their inhouse Appeals system and "independent" (cough cough) IAS.

I'd suggest you declined to waste time with what it widely reported as q kangaroo court "appeals" system which is far from independent. VCS/ Excel are a member of the IPC trade association - they are probably the IPC/ IAS main stakeholder!  VCS/ Excel's owner/ MD is a big cheese on the board at IPC (his picture and profile is on the IPC website!  IPC own the IAS (the so-called "Independent" Appeals Service) who only uphold a woeful 4% of motorists appeals- so their unregulated system is self loaded to self serve them!


So how can an Appeals Service owned by an ATA which VCS director/ owner is also a director of be fair  proportionate and independent.  He has quoted that he moved from the BPA because he wasn't happy with POPLA upholding motorists appeals (but is happy with IAS/ IPC because he can control the narrative better here).

Just hold out for court mate as that is the only true indepant process!  I'd argue there is no clear viewable 5 minute rule on thr signs, no alternative payment if you don't have a mobile, he fact there is no true independent appeals as there are major conflicts of interest exposed! If the Judge or their legal rep asks why you didn't engage then you have these facts to put to them. 

D_P_Dance

£160 amount claimed

They have added what appears to be an extra unlawful amount of £60 for debt collection. This amounts to double recovery and some Judges have dismissed an entire claim because of this. Read this and complain to your MP.

Excel v Wilkinson

At the Bradford County Court, District Judge Claire Jackson (now HHJ Jackson, a Specialist Civil Circuit Judge) decided to hear a 'test case' a few months ago, where £60 had been added to a parking charge despite Judges up and down the country repeatedly disallowing that sum and warning parking firms not to waste court time with such spurious claims.   That case was Excel v Wilkinson: G4QZ465V, heard in July 2020 and leave to appeal was refused and that route was not pursued.  The Judge concluded that such claims are proceedings with 'an improper collateral purpose'.   This Judge - and others who have since copied her words and struck dozens of cases out in late 2020 and into 2021 - went into significant detail and concluded that parking operators (such as this Claimant) are seeking to circumvent CPR 27.14 as well as breaching the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   DJ Hickinbottom has recently struck more cases out in that court area, stating: ''I find that striking out this claim is the only appropriate manner in which the disapproval of the court can be shown''.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/16qovzulab1szem/G4QZ465V%20Excel%20v%20Wilkinson.pdf?dl=0

However, a VCS appealed this so it may not apply in all cases, read this

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ntksx9g7177ahyg/VCS v Percy v1 Amendments (2).pdf?dl=0Also read this

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6279348/witness-statements-2-transcripts-re-parking-firms-false-costs-recorder-cohen-qc-judgment-2021/p1

Also consider complaining to The SRA about the solicitor, if one is involved They are fully aware of the unlawful nature of most of thse additions yet persist in adding them..

https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/problems/

ste220

sorry for the delay in replying. so i defended the claim on MCOL saying about the catch 22 with regards to potential unroadwothy vehicle. i have today recieved a letter from VCS stating that ELMS LEGAL are no longer acting on their behalf, and offering a reduced sum of £185. if not payed in 14 days they will procede to court. but will they?

KeithP

ste220 said:

sorry for the delay in replying. so i defended the claim on MCOL saying about the catch 22 with regards to potential unroadwothy vehicle. i have today recieved a letter from VCS stating that ELMS LEGAL are no longer acting on their behalf, and offering a reduced sum of £185. if not payed in 14 days they will procede to court. but will they?

Lick your finger, stick it up in the air and tell us which way the wind is blowing.

That letter is nothing new and doesn't alter anything.