Vehicle Control Services LJLA

Fruitcake

DisruptiveLad said:

It is the entire case.

Only if a judge agrees. We have seen at least one case on this forum where there was no contract evident, but the judge said the fact that the PPC had been operating there for years meant the landowner must have known about it, and therefore they, the PPC, must have had landowner authority to operate.
I believe the judge found in favour of the claimant.

It's judge bingo in the lower courts. Unless a verdict is given in a higher court, it cannot be persuasive or binding in the small claims court.

That's why we always tell posters to throw the kitchen sink at a defence, not just rely entirely on one point. Even then, it doesn't always work.

As for criminal activity/fraud, it can certainly be alleged and reported, but unless and until it is proven in a criminal court, it cannot be taken as fact.

Snakes_Belly

if the claim goes to court would it be vexatious (without merit) rather than fraud? Then the defendant would receive costs for unreasonable behaviour. But what if the PPC persists in issuing meritless claims and the motorist just pays up?

DisruptiveLad

That's why MPs need to be involved. They need to be asked to report these cases to the Dept of Justice - that's what I have done. If a company makes a false representation and asks for money on that basis, it's fraud. Sadly, Action Fraud are not interested. Again, I have asked my MP to contact them and question their entire rationale.

DisruptiveLad

Fruitcake, surely a defendant would speak up and create mayhem? I would. I wouldn't stand for a judge failing to establish PROOF (like in any court case in the UK) of authority. That's so basic it shouldn't be an issue. That's why MPs need to be lobbied and in turn they need to lobby the Dept of Justice.

Coupon-mad

JackShip said:

surely using the argument of lack of authority on the land is another weapon in the arsenal to use alongside the tried and tested

But it's not new.  It has been tried, tested and has won (some, not all) cases for years. This has been a standard argument in defences for a decade.

What worries me is that newbies seem to be getting a bit fixated on thinking something groundbreaking has changed about defences re this location, when it hasn't.

Cases are won here all the time.  We have a 99% win rate since 2016, so certainly be confident of having a good case but don't think someone's Court judgment is worth holding your breath for.  A judgment is not a transcript so it says nothing much and isn't a precedent.

DisruptiveLad

Why are so many ending up in court in the first place then? There's no need for court cases if people just respond to VCS and ask for proof. Stop treating them with respect. They are scammers. That's the sum total. My approach has, whether you agree with it or not, opened people's eyes to a fightback attitude. Upto January they were filling in this form or that form. No more. They need to disrupt. They're not battling police - they're battling scammers. A whole different ball game. Showing respect is a total non-no.

Coupon-mad

We don't show the actual scammers in this industry respect.

We have actively and successfully already changed things, by encouraging MP complaints for years, and by engaging with and leading change of hearts and minds in Government.

If you knew what people like me and @bargepole do, and have done since before clamping was banned in 2012, you'd know the level of fightback achieved and what we think about this rogue industry, and what we do and have done about it.

We don't tell people not to respond.  People come here at court stage having either failed with an appeal they did off-forum, or having wrongly ignored the PCN hoping it will go away.  That's why this forum deals with lots of court cases.

And dealing with a court claim does involve filling in 'this form and that form' or people will get default judgments.

Nothing has changed, nothing is new.

Asking your MP to take an accusation of fraud up with the Ministry of Justice won't get anywhere I'm afraid.  And new posters must never accuse a PPC of fraud.  That way lies exposure to costs because describing the area as 'private land' is not fraud.

DisruptiveLad

Representing land as 'private' and demanding money on that basis is an 'attempt to gain a financial advantage using false representation.' Please read Secs 2 and 3 Chapter 35 Fraud Act 2006. I used that against VCS and LJLA and won well before any court case. Why wasn't I taken to court if I was lying? My MP has been asked to refer VCS' court cases to the Department of Justice on the basis they MAY have been unsound. These are specifically cases of 'No Stopping' at LJLA which they won based on falsehoods. Just because people have done things a certain way for years, doesn't mean it's right. There are a number of ways to skin a cat and I'm using a different way to skin this cat. 

DisruptiveLad

On January 14th 2022 Elms Legal were representing VCS. They told me in a scheduled telephone meeting that 'VCS have advised us to proceed to court.' In their written report of that meeting, dated Jan 18, that had changed to 'should this case proceed to court'. Why did they change their tune? They changed because I threw every illegality in the book at them and given Elms are just a glorified debt recovery agency, owned by a guy with another debt recovery agency, realised everything I'd laid at their door was right. I had, by January 14th, already received a written statement from LJLA contradicting everything Elms/VCS had stated in writing. From that point onwards I was shooting fish in a barrel. 

DisruptiveLad

Nobody should be getting taken to court by VCS over 'No Stopping' at any airport in the UK. A simple response to them informing them their pics are inconclusive, should be enough to end any action. There should be no protracted process here at all.