VCS Fluttering Ticket / Valid Permit - We won...

Lagroid

Morning all, 
Just reading over the defence one last time before submitting. Checking every point applies. One I have noticed is point 7, pasted below:

"This finding is underpinned by the Government, who have now stated that attempts to gild the lily by adding 'debt recovery costs' were 'extorting money'. The Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities ('DLUHC') published in February 2022, a statutory Code of Practice, found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/private-parking-code-of-practice"

This publication was withdrawn on 7th June 2022, pending review, although is still available to read. Is it worth still using this? It is in the latest template defence linked in the NEWBIES thread, so assuming it's been used since the 7th of June without issue.

Also, point 8 states adding costs is now banned, which isn't strictly true based on the report being withdrawn. 

I've also added the following point further down in the document: 

"The Defendant has documented a lack of clear signage upon entering the car park. This is a violation of the guidelines set by the IPC (International Parking Community), of which the Claimant is a member. According to the IPC guidelines, operators must display entrance signs at defined entrances. These signs should clearly indicate that the motorist is entering private land and direct them to the signs displaying the full terms and conditions within the car park. The Claimant is in clear breach of its own documented guidelines, which can be found at the following link: https://irp.cdn-website.com/262226a6/files/uploaded/Code_of_Practice_v8.pdf"

Thanks,

Not_A_Hope

You can quote the COP as it shows the governments intention and acknowledges their attitude to debt recovery costs. 

You should amend any sentences including banned costs to indicate the intention to ban them.

Any evidence regarding lack of clear signage is often a winning point and should always be included.

Lagroid

Not_A_Hope said:

You can quote the COP as it shows the governments intention and acknowledges their attitude to debt recovery costs. 

You should amend any sentences including banned costs to indicate the intention to ban them.

Any evidence regarding lack of clear signage is often a winning point and should always be included.

Amazing will reword. Thank you for clarifying. It might be worth mentioning in the NEWBIES thread where the template defence is linked. 

Coupon-mad

No need because it's only temporarily stalled and we are anticipating the Government's final Public Consultation to bring that new Code forward within weeks.

Hence why you include it in your defence anyway because your case won't be at hearing stage for months.

B789

I believe that only two chapters of the COP are under JR. The rest of the COP, as far as I understand, will remain as is.

Lagroid

Morning all,

From experience, how long does it take for the CCBC to reply with an acknowledgement of the defence emailed to them?

Sent it at 9:05am this morning (to CCBCAQ@Justice.gov.uk) along with the Claimant's legal team.

EDIT:

Saw the following in another thread after searching the email + "how long"

"When you are happy with the content, your Defence should be filed via email as suggested here:
Print your Defence.
Sign it and date it.
Scan the signed document back in and save it as a pdf.
Send that pdf as an email attachment to CCBCAQ@Justice.gov.uk
Just put the claim number and the word Defence in the email title, and in the body of the email something like 'Please find my Defence attached'.
Log into MCOL after a few days to see if the Claim is marked "defence received". If not chase the CCBC until it is.
Do not be surprised to receive an early copy of the Claimant's Directions Questionnaire, they are just trying to keep you under pressure.
Wait for your DQ from the CCBC, or download one from the internet, and then re-read post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread to find out exactly what to do with it."

I will wait a couple of days and check the MCOL portal.

Thanks

Coupon-mad

You MUST get an immediate acknowledgement email. Send it again.  Try a different browser.

Lagroid

Coupon-mad said:

You MUST get an immediate acknowledgement email. Send it again.  Try a different browser.

I didn’t see this during office hours. I will send again tomorrow. 

As a newbie following the advice, it might be worth adding the immediate response in the NEWBIES thread, just to avoid other posts like mine above. 

Would it be appropriate to resend continuously to both CCBC & the parking companies legal team every 10 minutes until I get a response? 

Thanks 

Lagroid

Found other posts where people never received an auto reply after multiple attempts. Some suggestions around lowercase & uppercase, as well as using the other ccbc email addresses in conjunction with the correct one, to trigger the auto reply. 

It’s shocking how flimsy a government system runs. 

I intend to stick around after my case on this forum, so hoping my reply here finds somebody else in a similar situation in the future and helps them out. 

Another suggestion, it might be worth trying different email addresses at different domains, for example Hotmail & Gmail.

One thing to note, the thread I was reading the member didn’t even get an acknowledgment of their AoS. I DO have this, thankfully. 

Regards 

Lagroid

Sent the email from a Hotmail address this morning, got the automatic response from CCBC