VCS in Salford

Le_Kirk

angry_vcs said:

The facts as known to the Defendant:

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question.

3. The defendant was at the site to assist a family member in moving out of their residence. The defendant was  assisting by taking several items of furniture and other items to a new location. This nessicated necessitated  trips up to the 10th floor and had to leave the vehicle unattended.

The defendant left his vehicle in a location which allowed reasonable access for loading.

On returning to the Vehicle the defendant found an affixed notice labelled "Privacy Notice" there was no mention of any action being taken  or of what any contravention there might be.

As the lettings office appeared to be closed (doors locked and no staff visible ) the defendant was not able to make any queries enquiries - and had to leave to unload at the family member's new residence.

A couple of days later The the defendants wife was in the area and able to visit X1 lettings and ask about the privacy notice and was informed that if the lady at the management company was copied in on the appeal to the ticket she would ensure the ticket was cancelled.

The defendant appealed to VCS using the companies online form on 3rd July. mentioning that the vehicle was there loading and not just parked. And included mxxxxx@x1lettings.com in the details so vcs could confirm.

The appeal was rejected by VCS on 11th August, 39 days later (they sate they would respond in 28 days)

On 18th August, with the appeal rejection letter the defendant visited x1 lettings office and discussed the matter with a manager there, who agreed the vehicle was onsite legitimately and would request cancellation

On 19th August VCS rejected x1 lettings request to cancel, stating it “ it is not within the 28 day timeline.”

Notwithstanding that a lot of this should be kept for the witness statement stage as per @Coupon-mad's post, every paragraph requires a number and there are some suggestions for you.  Are you defending as keeper and not driver?  If so, perhaps the defence should state so.

angry_vcs

Hi again thanks for all the input !
I've had a very busy week so only just gotround to updating this would the following be better for my part of tyhe defence ?

1. The defendant was at the site to assist a familly member in moving out of thier residence. 

2. The defandant left the vehical in a location which allowed reasonable access for loading. this is in accordance with  Jopson v Homeguard Case 9GF0A9E

3. On returning to the Vehical the defandant found an affixed notice labeled "Privacy Notice" there was no mention of any action being taken .

4. The lettings agency confirnmed the vehical was permitted to load on site and this was in the ticket appeal

5. The lettings agency did request cancellation of the ticket directly with the claimant.

Obviously I'll adjust the paragraph numbers to adjust.


In the tennancy agreement this is all that is mentioned about parking 
16. Cars and Parking
16.1. To park a private vehicle only at the Premises, if applicable.
16.2. To park in the car parking space, garage or driveway allocated to the Premises, if applicable.
16.3. To display a valid permit in your vehicle, whilst parking in the car parking space, garage or driveway allocated to the premises, if applicable.
16.4. To keep any garage, driveway, or parking space free of oil and to pay for the removal and cleaning of any spillage caused by a vehicle of the Tenant, his family, contractors or visitors.
16.5. To remove all vehicles belonging to the Tenant, his family or visitors at the end of the Tenancy.
16.6. Not to park any vehicle at the Premises that is not in road worthy condition and fully taxed. 

And this is a photo of the sign they are relying on  apart from the fact it's partly covered by foliage would I be right in the fact it is a forbidding sign and should I mention this in the defence ?

Mouse007

Yup, that's forbidding and worth mentioning. No contract could have been created by that sign, no contractual licence can flow from those words. They only set you up for a claim of trespass not breach of contract.

It is worth understanding that you were in any event not parked according to Jopson v Homeguard. You were loading.

You need 2 to be:

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle in question.

Fruitcake

angry_vcs said:

Hi again thanks for all the input !
I've had a very busy week so only just gotround to updating this would the following be better for my part of tyhe defence ?

1. The defendant was at the site to assist a familly member in moving out of thier residence. 
2. The defandant left the vehical in a location which allowed reasonable access for loading. this is in accordance with  Jopson v Homeguard Case 9GF0A9E

3. On returning to the Vehical the defandant found an affixed notice labeled "Privacy Notice" there was no mention of any action being taken .

4. The lettings agency confirnmed the vehical was permitted to load on site and this was in the ticket appeal

5. The lettings agency did request cancellation of the ticket directly with the claimant.

Obviously I'll adjust the paragraph numbers to adjust.


In the tennancy agreement this is all that is mentioned about parking 
16. Cars and Parking
16.1. To park a private vehicle only at the Premises, if applicable.
16.2. To park in the car parking space, garage or driveway allocated to the Premises, if applicable.
16.3. To display a valid permit in your vehicle, whilst parking in the car parking space, garage or driveway allocated to the premises, if applicable.
16.4. To keep any garage, driveway, or parking space free of oil and to pay for the removal and cleaning of any spillage caused by a vehicle of the Tenant, his family, contractors or visitors.
16.5. To remove all vehicles belonging to the Tenant, his family or visitors at the end of the Tenancy.
16.6. Not to park any vehicle at the Premises that is not in road worthy condition and fully taxed. 

And this is a photo of the sign they are relying on  apart from the fact it's partly covered by foliage would I be right in the fact it is a forbidding sign and should I mention this in the defence ?

Para 1, use the standard wording from the defence template.

Para 2, use the wording as advised by Mouse007

Paras 3 onwards,
State that no Notice to Driver was ever affixed to the vehicle nor handed to the driver whilst the vehicle was stationary in breach of the IPC Code of Practice and in breach of the PoFA 2012.

State that the vehicle was not parked but was stopped whilst loading/unloading took place. Jopson v Homeguard, case number B9GF0A9E applies where Judge Harris stated that loading and unloading is not parking. This was an appeal case and therefore is persuasive on the lower courts. Also state that the lettings agent (insert name) had given permission for this loading unloading event, and subsequently instructed the claimant to cancel the charge.

If not already mentioned, primacy of contract, residents existing rights including those transferred to visitors, no mention of the site being infested by an unregulated parking company, no requirement to pay parking charges, and no mention of court claims.
Changes to a tenancy can only rake place if approved in accordance with a ballot as per the strict requirements of the landlord and Tenant Act 1987.

Forbidding signs. Nothing is being offered that the resident does not already have therefore there can be no acceptance and therefore no contract. 

Evidence and exhibits go with the witness statement later in the process. Nothing goes with the defence.

Coupon-mad

Typo: vehical should be vehicle

angry_vcs

Again - thanks so much for the input for everyone. it is very much appreciated.
Here is my full defence using the template from the newbies thread. 
Hopefully I've got more right now 

Thanks all

N THE COUNTY COURT

Claim No.:  xxxxxx

Between

Full name of parking firm Ltd, not the solicitor!

(Claimant) 

- and -  

Defendant’s name from N1 claim (can’t be changed to driver now)                        

 (Defendant)

_________________

DEFENCE

 

1. The parking charges referred to in this claim did not arise from any agreement of terms. The charge and the claim was an unexpected shock. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.  It is denied that any conduct by the driver was a breach of any prominent term and it is denied that this Claimant (understood to have a bare licence as managers) has standing to sue or form contracts in their own name. Liability is denied, whether or not the Claimant is claiming 'keeper liability', which is unclear from the Particulars.

 

The facts as known to the Defendant:

2. The defendant was at the site to assist a family member in moving out of their residence. And thus moving several bulky items.

3. The defendant stopped the vehicle in a location which allowed reasonable access for loading. this is in accordance with  Jopson v Homeguard Case number B9GF0A9E

4. no Notice to Driver was ever affixed to the vehicle nor handed to the driver whilst the vehicle was stationary in breach of the IPC Code of Practice and in breach of the PoFA 2012.

5. The lettings agency, X1 lettings, confirmed the vehicle was permitted to load on site and this was in the ticket appeal.

6. The lettings agency, X1 lettings requested cancellation of the ticket directly with the claimant.

7 The signage, such as it is, is of a forbidding nature and no contract can be formed from this.

8. The facts in this defence come from the Defendant's own knowledge and honest belief.  To pre-empt the usual template responses from this serial litigator: the court process is outside of the Defendant's life experience and they cannot be criticised for adapting some pre-written wording from a reliable advice resource. The Claimant is urged not to patronise the Defendant with (ironically template) unfounded accusations of not understanding their defence. 

9. With regard to template statements, the Defendant observes after researching other parking claims, that the Particulars of Claim ('POC') set out a cut-and-paste incoherent statement of case.  Prior to this - and in breach of the pre-action protocol for 'Debt' Claims - no copy of the contract (sign) accompanied any Letter of Claim.  The POC is sparse on facts about the allegation which makes it difficult to respond in depth at this time; however the claim is unfair, objectionable, generic and inflated.  

And the rest from the Newbies template renumbered to suit

Fruitcake

You don't have to take our advice, but please note that you have omitted a lot of the specific wording you were advised to use. The wording you have been given is there for a reason. 

Not parked, appeal case persuasive on the lower courts, primacy of contract, no mention of PPCs or paying PPCs or court in the tenancy agreement, Landlord and Tenant Act, are all there for a reason.

You haven't explained whether the driver was a resident, or whether the resident had transferred their rights as landholder to a visitor.

Mouse007

And you are still missing this

Mouse007 said:

You need 2 to be:

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle in question.

angry_vcs

Fruitcake said:

You don't have to take our advice, but please note that you have omitted a lot of the specific wording you were advised to use. The wording you have been given is there for a reason. 

Not parked, appeal case persuasive on the lower courts, primacy of contract, no mention of PPCs or paying PPCs or court in the tenancy agreement, Landlord and Tenant Act, are all there for a reason.

You haven't explained whether the driver was a resident, or whether the resident had transferred their rights as landholder to a visitor.

Thanks . I'll re work it - your advice is vey much appreciated.

angry_vcs

Mouse007 said:

And you are still missing this

Mouse007 said:

You need 2 to be:

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle in question.

Thanks - I thought I'd put that in - a copy and paste fail there ! 
I'll post an update tomorow.