VCS LJLA 'Stopping PCN' - got to small claims court before seeing this forum

mcan541908

Great, thanks for that.

mcan541908

I know there was some discussion elsewhere earlier about whether or not to raise the matter of fraud with VCS but cannot see how that was concluded.

I have drafted the following letter to VCS - and would appreciate any comments before I send it off.  They are due to pay the court fee tomorrow and wonder if this would deter or encourage them?  (I've drafted a similar letter to LJLA and plan to send that off soon too).

1st May 2022

Your ref.: JB/Lit/VCSXXXXXX

 

 

Vehicle Control Services Limited

Central Payment Office

P O Box 4777

Sheffield

S9 9DJ

 

 

 

 

Dear Sirs

 

Re: XXXXXXXX

 

I refer to your letter dated 14/04/2022.

 

I am surprised and disappointed that you are prepared to continue your greedy bullying and harassment in response to my attempt simply to deliver my daughter and her friend (the airport's customers) to a 'free drop-off zone'.

 

I reject your offer of a reduced settlement charge; the idea of me paying any settlement charge is utter nonsense in view of the circumstances surrounding the allegation.  Mindful as I am that under the Civil Procedure Rules, litigants are expected to try to resolve their disputes wherever possible, here is what I am prepared to do in pursuit of this objective:

 

Firstly, I require you to provide me with the following documentation to support your claim. I require from you within the next 7 days:

1.    a copy of the fully compliant Companies Act 2006 contract you hold with LJLA, current at the time of the alleged incident.

○     It is my understanding the no such contract existed that was current at the time of the alleged incident.

2.    a copy of LJLA’s own Parking Terms and Conditions valid at the time of the alleged incident.

○     It is my understanding that in these T&Cs it is stated that your authority only extends to cover inside car parks, it does not extend to roads.

3.    A picture taken at night of each of the ‘no stopping’, directional and other signs in place at the time of the incident along with details of their exact location on a plan:

○     (a) on the approach to the airport and the free drop off zone (Drop off 2?),

○     (b) on or adjacent to the roundabout itself which is near the location of the incident,

○     (c) at the exit from the roundabout to the location of the alleged incident and

○     (d) at or near to, and clearly visible from, the location of the incident.

■     It is my view that the signage in place, when viewed by the driver of a moving vehicle at night, was:

●     (a) not sufficient to form the basis of the contract you claim to have and

●     (b) not sufficient to provide clear direction to my intended destination, i.e. the free drop off zone (I am tempted to believe, given your reputation, that the signage is deliberately conflicting within itself, ambiguous and misleading but accept that this just might be due to your incompetence or negligence).

4.    A copy of all photos and videos that you hold of me and / or my car in the location of the alleged incident, and taken by you at the time of the alleged incident.

○     It is my view that the pictures you have provided on the PCN are inconclusive.  Until you provide verifiable proof that my vehicle was where you say it was, and verifiable proof that it was clear that details of the conditions that you claim applied to the location were actually in place at that location, then you have no case.

5.    Evidence to support your claim that the land in question is private land and was not subject to Airport Byelaws at the time of the alleged incident.

○     It is my understanding that Airport Byelaws were in place at the time; and must have been in place for the airport to hold a licence to operate.  Additionally, the byelaws had, at the time, been confirmed by a government minister to be still live and not rescinded; and, in LJLA’s amended byelaws application dated September 2021, they requested that the existing byelaws be rescinded – that seems to confirm they were still in place at the time of this incident.   Also, I understand that the judge in a case on March 10th dismissed the case based on VCS' inability to prove the land was private. 

6.    ALL evidence you have that the red lines on the site, and specifically in the location of the alleged incident, comply with statutory regulations.

7.    Confirmation of the basis upon which you obtained my vehicle details from DVLC.

○     It is my understanding that such details are only available in relation to parking offences and car parks; when your own documentation clearly refers to this alleged incident as a ‘stopping’, not a ‘parking’ incident (the two actions are clearly differentiated in the OED and other recognised dictionaries) and occurring on a road not in a car park; additionally, as set out in 1 to 5 above, you knew or should have known that you had no valid case - yet still applied for details.

 

In the absence of all of this information being supplied in full, within 7 days, this is what I am prepared to do:

1.    I will consider an apology from you for your inadequate ‘drop off’ signage and your subsequent dreadful bullying and harassment, should you wish to make one.

2.    I shall be willing to accept a reduced settlement charge from you (in respect of my costs in this court case along with the compensation that I shall seek with regard to the unnecessary stress that your continued, greedy bullying and harassment has caused to me) of £415.00 (a similar percentage reduction to that offered by you) payable within 21 days from the date of this letter. Please forward to me a cheque for that amount. This offer of a reduced settlement charge is made on a ‘without prejudice (save as to cost)’ basis.

3.    I shall bring this letter to the courts attention should you continue with your claim.

4.    I shall in future attempt to persuade my family, friends and acquaintances to use Manchester or some other local airport rather than LJLA in order to minimise any further unpleasant contact with you.

5.    I shall attempt to find time to contribute to any discussions in the local newspaper or social media to seek to ensure that other potential customers are fully aware of the negative attitudes you have and the greedy bullying and harassment tactics that you employ; and shall have no hesitation in assisting them in understanding how to deal with you.

 

Additionally, I should make clear to you that I believe your action in obtaining my vehicle keeper details from DVLA seems to be in contravention of DVLAs requirements and your trade association’s code of practice; and I shall be bringing this to their attention.

○     It is my understanding that such keeper details are only available in relation to parking offences and car parks; when your own documentation clearly refers to this alleged incident as a ‘stopping’, not a ‘parking’ incident and not in a car park.  The two actions ‘stopping’ and ‘parking’ are clearly differentiated in the OED and other recognised dictionaries.  Further, I believe that you knew or should have known that your allegation has no merit yet still applied for the details.

 

Finally, I should make clear to you that I believe a number of your actions seem as if they might constitute fraud, i.e. if a company / individual attempts to obtain a financial advantage by falsely representing a legal or other fact, that, according to the Fraud Act 2006 Chapter 35 Secs 2 and 3, is fraud.   I shall be referring these actions, listed below, to www.actionfraud.police.uk for investigation:

·         Your PCN / NTK seems to be an attempt to obtain a financial advantage by false representation under Sec 2 Chpt 35 Fraud Act 2006.

·         In sending me, or engaging others to send me, further notices / letters / claims for something OUTSIDE a car park, you are breaching the airport's own parking Ts and Cs. That would also seem to be ‘false representation’ under the 2006 Fraud Act.

·         Representing land at LJLA as 'private' and demanding money coupled with images and threatening language on that basis would also seem to be an 'attempt to gain a financial advantage using false representation.', as Secs 2 and 3 Chapter 35 Fraud Act 2006.

·         Claiming that you are entitled to add an extra sum to the PCN charge in various documents including the court claim, knowing full well that adding such sums is double recovery and an abuse of the court process; and that typically such claims will be struck out, would also seem to be an 'attempt to gain a financial advantage using false representation.', as Secs 2 and 3 Chapter 35 Fraud Act 2006.

 

I do hope that you will now stop wasting my time and that of the court with this matter. 

 

 

Yours faithfully

 

 

 

X X XXXXXXXXX

 

Coupon-mad

Remove all the end paragraphs about the DVLA (because it us incorrect to say they can't get DVLA data for no stopping cases - they can and the DVLA don't differentiate).

And ABSOLUTELY 100% remove all and every accusation of fraud.

This is just the sort of thing that is going to get a new poster into trouble with the courts, and maybe clobbered with costs. You cannot throw around accusations of fraud.  You will be attacked for unreasonable conduct just like OPS v Wilshaw, where we had to Crowd fund to cover her £3k in costs.  Not caused by us, BTW.

This is exactly why i've repeatedly asked @DisruptiveLad to please stop posts about VCS 'fraud' allegations that come across as egging people on to do that.  I've warned and warned against it.  Do not go there!

mcan541908

Ah, ok. Thanks for that. I wondered where the 'fraud' debate had ended up.  VCS's actions do seem to meet the definition and DL seemed to encourage it, but he is not on the scene any more due to other commitments. I don't want to take unnecessary risks, so will take it out..

mcan541908

I sent a letter to VCS and a complaint letter to LJLA, both via email; I have now had an initial response from LJLA, details as follows.

I said to LJLA customer services:

" Re: VCS Parking Charge Notice VCSXXXXXX

 I am surprised and disappointed that Vehicle Control Services is continuing its greedy bullying and harassment in response to my attempt simply to deliver my daughter and her friend (the airport's customers) to a 'free drop-off zone' back in 2018.  We have now reached the stage where we are due in court on 1st June 2022.

 In order to prepare for the court hearing I require from you ALL evidence of your communication with the Chief Constable which culminated in permission being granted for the red lines on the site and specifically in the location of, and the approach to, the alleged incident (VCS will be able to tell you where this is).  Would you please forward this to me within the next 7 days.

 I completely rejected VCS’s PCN for ‘stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited’ originally, carefully explaining my actions on the day but have been unable to get VCS to withdraw the PCN or their claim.  They continue their well known game of trying to frighten your customers, and those delivering your customers to you, into paying up money they do not owe.

 . . . . . .

I do hope (for your own reputation and that of The City of Liverpool generally) that you will stop supporting VCS  in these heinous activities and that you will instruct VCS immediately to withdraw their claim against me and stop wasting my time and that of the court with this matter. 

..................."

LJLA responded this morning via email, as follows:

" 

xxxxxxxxx (Liverpool John Lennon Airport) May 9, 2022, 9:02 GMT+1 Dear XXXXXXXXXX   Without Prejudice   Thank you for your email requesting red route information. We are unable, without your permission, to view the particular incident which resulted in you receiving the PCN however if you are able to provide that authorisation we can review the footage and respond to your specific case appropriately.   The Red Route installation was actioned a number of years ago and within all required guidelines. Whilst we cannot be 100% certain, given the colleague changes since then, we don’t believe Merseyside Police approval was required. With reference to other documents Liverpool Airport Ltd aren’t at liberty to disclose the information or documents which you have requested. I can confirm however that Liverpool Airport is willing to cooperate with any disclosure application which is made as part of any court proceedings.   In the meantime we strongly advise you proceed through the appeals process as specified in paperwork referencing your particular PCN and the reasons for your ticket being issued.  Individuals who receive a PCN and who believe they have been unfairly treated can initially appeal to VCS, if having had their appeal to VCS refused, they can subsequently appeal to an Independent Appeals Service (IAS). Although administered by the Independent Parking Committee (IPC), each appeal is dealt with by an Independent, qualified solicitor or barrister who will decide if the charge was lawfully issued. The Independent Appeals Services and Parking on Private Land Appeals assesses each case individually, and on a legal basis. The IPC have no say over the outcome of an appeal submitted to the IAS, which is Independent from the IPC. In addition, the appeal is made at the cost of the operator, in this case VCS, and the cost is higher if the appeal is upheld so it is not within their interest to be over zealous issuing PCN’s.     Kind regards XXXXXXXXX Customer Service Executive

All the blurb about appeals seems to indicate that they either didn't read my letter or that this is simply a template response they've sent out.

I propose replying to authorise them to review the footage and 'reminding them that we are past appeals etc'.

A few questions, if I may:

1. is it worth including the standard paragraph from the WS template about ADS?

2. What is a 'disclosure application made as part of court proceedings'?

3. Should I encourage LJLA to supply any 'Red Line information' they have to VCS for inclusion in their court documentation; which I will then get to see?

4. What would be the best way to deal with their response on the Red Route issue?  DisruptiveLad seemed to think there may be something worth pursuing here!

Any advice or comments welcome; thanks in advance.

Jenni_D

I've not read your WS in detail ... in respect of double recovery have you included the ministerial foreword for the new Parking Code of Practice where the junior minister says something like "debt recovery charges not incurred and are designed to extort money from motorists"?

mcan541908

Hi Jenni_D, 

Yes, I have got that in at para. 47 in my WS

Coupon-mad

When you reply, give them permission to review the 'footage' (which suggests moving images) and tell them you want a copy of that footage under your SAR rights because VCS have failed to produce 'footage' that you didn't know was held by their rogue agent.

Also ask them when are the Airport proposing to review the new parking Code of Practice because their out of control agent isn't complying, going by multiple complaints and accounts online about predatory ticketing and unclear signs.

Given the new Code (February 2022) is now statute law and part of the new regulation of the parking industry, just when was this chancer of an ex-clamper firm proposing to tell LJLA about the new Code and have a conversation about how to clean up their act by 2023 at the latest, to avoid a DVLA ban on getting keeper data, which would stop VCS from being able to send any PCNs at all, ending their so called 'parking' enforcement overnight?

Had LJLA given any serious consideration to not outsourcing this regime to a rogue ex-clamper and instead, simply and honestly paying a small team of employees to operate fairly and enforce the parking/stopping rules, this time acting with integrity towards customers.  

The Airport also needs to make the drop off signage far clearer (VCS have no incentive to change it) to avoid entrapping so many customers - according to hundreds of online accounts - into VCS' well-planned game.

A landowner thinking it's a cheap way to enforce, by not paying a parking operator as they would other contractors, causes an unfair race to issue as many unfair charges as they possibly can.  The model is all wrong and victims of this scam approach believe that the Airport's unsuitable and self-serving moneymaking (for VCS) contract needs to end if they want the Airport to recover after the pandemic.

This whole contract needs urgent reconsideration (preferably ending), if they want to avoid the DVLA very possibly banning VCS once the new upcoming Government Scrutiny Board receives enough complaints and evidence.  The entire house of cards could be blown over by the DVLA and 'being a member of the IPC' is not a safeguard, it's an old boys' club.  The new Govt Regulations announced by the DLUHC in February 2022 can end unfair ticketing overnight which would leave the Airport high and dry.

mcan541908

Coupon-mad,

Thanks for feedback, changes and additions made.

mcan541908

Got a response from LJLA, as follows:

"  Dear XXXXXXXXXXX

 .......  I have requested images of your PCN from VCS and reviewed them in line with our guidelines and have attached them at your request.

 

By way of background the operation at Liverpool John Lennon Airport is an area of private land visibly marked out by double red lines, where stopping for any purposes is prohibited at all times. No stopping, waiting, loading or picking up or setting down of passengers is permitted on red route double red lines. There are over 80 high profile signs explaining the red route to drivers, all signage exceeds the recognised industry standards, with some as large as 2m by 1m on the airport approach road and surrounding roads. The scheme was introduced in June 2012 due to growing congestion caused by vehicles stopping and blocking roadways and in particular, emergency access routes at the airport. This congestion created significant safety risks for other motorist, pedestrians on the airport site and presented the risk of costly delays for emergency vehicles responding to incidents at the airport. The Airport thoroughly considered the congestion situation and was provided with guidance from a number of bodies prior to introducing the scheme including the British Parking Association (BPA), Liverpool City Council, and Merseyside Police.

 

Having said the above, passengers have a choice of clearly signposted parking and drop off/pick-up options available to them at the Airport including a free drop off/pick area (up to 40 minutes).

 

VCS whom you refer to, are the operator company who manage the red route on behalf of Liverpool John Lennon Airport. The Airport team work closely with VCS to ensure the guidelines and procedures in place are implemented and are compliant with all industry best practice. The guidelines for issuing Penalty Notices cover a range of events depending on the passenger behaviour relating to each incident. The majority of the contraventions issued are based on normal driving requirements in line with the Highway Code, Department for Transport and Traffic Management agency guidelines.

 

In regards to your specific incident, I have viewed the images of the specific location and incident which triggered your PCN and a vehicle can be clearly seen parking on the road and loading luggage and passengers on a red route road. Unfortunately by choosing to stop on the clearly marked red route instead of using any of the designated parking areas, your vehicle was in contravention of the parking regulations and subsequently received a Parking Charge Notice with payment of this fine continuing to be pursued in the normal way.

 

Liverpool Airport are therefore not in a position to be overriding the decision given the evidence available. We apply a consistent and fair approach to passenger issues raised regarding issued PCNs and to override this would be inconsistent with both the appeals process and other requests.

I appreciate this will not be the response you were hoping for, however I hope you understand we have to be consistent in our approach. I can confirm that Liverpool Airport is willing to cooperate with any disclosure application which is made as part of any court proceedings. 

 

Given your feedback and position regarding the appeals process we are unable to assist you further.

 

Regards XXXXXXXXX
Commercial Director

 ........."

Seems to have conveniently ignored most of the relevant points of my argument and no response to Coupon-Mad's more general points, which I'd included.

My propossed response is included in the next Post, any observatons or comments welcome - although I appreciate it is a bit long!