VCS - Court claim - Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited

Coupon-mad

No I don't agree.  I think those are perfectly relevant cases for you, because the clause about 'no stopping' (and certainly the onerous punitive charge) was not readable until after inadvertently 'concluding' the alleged contract by momentarily stopping.  The info about the punitive charge comes too late.

As you had pre-paid parking, I would add to the end of paragraph 3:

The only 'parking contractual terms' that the Defendant agreed to at the Airport were those relating to the pre-paid parking, which was concluded online in advance.  The Defendant gained no amenity from the momentary stop on the way to their car park destination and there can be no legitimate interest in penalising patrons of the Airport in this predatory fashion.


You could also add stuff about the roadways being public highway under statutory control, governed either from byelaws or by the Traffic Management Act.  We have a VCS Airport defence this week with that point in.

spikeycacti22

Coupon-mad said:

No I don't agree.  I think those are perfectly relevant cases for you, because the clause about 'no stopping' (and certainly the onerous punitive charge) was not readable until after inadvertently 'concluding' the alleged contract by momentarily stopping.  The info about the punitive charge comes too late.

That makes sense, thanks for the explanation.

Thank you all for your help so far! I'm hoping to get this defence filed tomorrow as I'm going away before the deadline day (Monday). I'm also planning to visit the airport tomorrow to gather some additional evidence. I suspect any findings will be most relevant for the WS.

I'd really appreciate any thoughts on the final draft below:

The facts as known to the Defendant

2. The Defendant travelled to Leeds Bradford airport on the date to occupy pre-paid parking.  It is admitted that the Defendant was both the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle, but liability is denied.  The Defendant understands that being lost and disoriented due to the roadways and confusing signs constitutes a reasonable excuse for stopping momentarily, in order to verify directions. 

3. In the appeal case of Laura Jopson vs Homeguard Securities, His Honour Judge J Harris QC determined that stopping can be defined as  “[...] coping with some vicissitude of short duration.” The Defendant’s vehicle stopping for a period of less than 30 seconds can be considered a “stopping” event as opposed to “parking”. The only 'parking contractual terms' that the Defendant agreed to at the Airport were those relating to the pre-paid parking, which was concluded online in advance.  The Defendant gained no amenity from the momentary stop on the way to their car park destination and there can be no legitimate interest in penalising patrons of the Airport in this predatory fashion.

4. The location of the event is entirely accessible to the public; there are no barriers or obstructions to prevent public access. This falls in the definition of a “road” as per section 142 in the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. Therefore the claimed “parking charge” did not occur in a private car park, where the Claimant may have permission to form its own contracts.  Instead it was on a public road, meaning any penalty falls within statutory regime, enforceable only by Traffic Officers as defined in the Traffic Management Act 2004.

5. The Claimant’s case is that the area is intended as “a zone where stopping is prohibited” at all times. The signage would therefore be prohibitive in nature and would not communicate any offer of consideration (ie: such as stopping or parking, at a price). In the absence of any consideration no contract exists. 

6. The particulars outline the contract’s accepting conduct to be the entering of private land.  When approaching the signs in a vehicle, it is not possible to perform the declining conduct without first performing the accepting conduct.  In this scenario the Defendant has not had reasonable time to read and digest the terms. The "no stopping" term was forced upon the Defendant, rendering it an unfair term as stated in Schedule 2 to the Consumer Rights Act 2015: 

i.  “A term which has the object or effect of irrevocably binding the consumer to terms with which the consumer has had no real opportunity of becoming acquainted before the conclusion of the contract.”

7. Judge Moloney QC reiterates this in Ransomes vs. Anderson (“the Ransomes case”), a persuasive County Court judgement on appeal:

i.  “the notice was insufficiently clear to constitute a valid contractual offer capable of acceptance by conduct. […] Although the doctrine of acceptance by conduct, on the basis of the terms on a notice in a parking place or similar zone, is an obviously right, valuable and useful one, it is an essential minimum that the contract be sufficiently simple and clear that the motorist is in no doubt before he performs the accepting conduct what he is letting himself in for”.

8. Whether or not the Claimant alleges that they operate under, or rely upon, the Leeds Bradford airport byelaws, these create a level of statutory parking control and must take precedence over the land and cannot be overruled by a claim pleaded in contract or tort. The Defendant’s action was aligned with the exceptions as defined in the airport byelaws. 

i. Byelaw 5.16. “No person shall without reasonable excuse when on foot or whilst using, driving or propelling a Vehicle, neglect, fail or refuse to comply with an indication or direction given by: - A sign [...], Any road marking on such a road... ”. Being lost and disoriented can be considered as a reasonable excuse.  

ii. Byelaw 5.3. “Except in an emergency, no person shall leave or park a Vehicle or cause it to wait for a period in excess of the permitted time in an area where the period of waiting is restricted by a Sign.”. The Defendant believes the confusion caused by unexpectedly turning down the wrong road, which led them down a one way route, could be classed as an emergency. The only action the Defendant felt was safe in that moment was to stop the vehicle. 

9. It appears that the Claimant has not only attempted to create a contract to apply to a public highway, but has also bypassed Airport Byelaws in doing so, defining contradictory terms and conditions that allow them to profiteer from the use of the publicly accessible roads.  Even if the Claimant has authority to do that, where is the evidence that these specific areas of the roadways fall within their area map of enforcement, and where are the pictures and locations of the signs that constitute such a “contract”.

I am also using the majority of points from the template. I now have a total of 31 points in my defence.

A final question about the template sections. Some of the words and phrases use underlining. Is it okay to include the formatting in the submitted defence?

Thanks again, I couldn't have gotten this far without your assistance

Coupon-mad

I think I'd take this out from where it is buried in the byelaws quotes and put it at the end of your paragraph 2 instead:

"The Defendant believes the confusion caused by unexpectedly turning down the wrong road, which led them down a one way route, could be classed as an emergency. The only action the Defendant felt was safe in that moment was to stop the vehicle. "

spikeycacti22

I have submitted my defence via email and received acknowledgement. My visit to the airport yesterday wasn't helpful with the case as they've added a number of new signs since I was "caught" stopping, including a particularly big bright one to the car park (if they'd had that before there's absolutely no chance we'd have missed it...). I'm thinking of querying with Leeds Bradford aiport directly to see when they put that sign up for the car park, if it was them who did it.

I have also received my SAR response including the full video footage of the event, which quite clearly shows that we were confused and had no idea where we were supposed to be going. Can video evidence be submitted as apart of a WS?

Le_Kirk

spikeycacti22 said:

I have also received my SAR response including the full video footage of the event, which quite clearly shows that we were confused and had no idea where we were supposed to be going. Can video evidence be submitted as apart of a WS?

Yes it can be provided it is on a durable medium such as a CD/DVD or memory stick attached securely to your bundle.  It cannot be sent as a link by e-mail as that can be altered after you have submitted the link/e-mail.

Fruitcake

spikeycacti22 said:

I have submitted my defence via email and received acknowledgement. My visit to the airport yesterday wasn't helpful with the case as they've added a number of new signs since I was "caught" stopping, including a particularly big bright one to the car park (if they'd had that before there's absolutely no chance we'd have missed it...). I'm thinking of querying with Leeds Bradford aiport directly to see when they put that sign up for the car park, if it was them who did it.

I have also received my SAR response including the full video footage of the event, which quite clearly shows that we were confused and had no idea where we were supposed to be going. Can video evidence be submitted as apart of a WS?

Definitely ask the airport management or safety team when the additional signs went up.

You could also ask the local council planning department if the PPC has advertising consent for existing as well as new signs at the site. Not having it is a criminal offence, but only the council can pursue it through the courts. If consent was never granted, or consent for new signs has not yet been granted then complain to the local council, the airport owner/management company and your MP.

B789

spikeycacti22 said:

My visit to the airport yesterday wasn't helpful with the case as they've added a number of new signs since I was "caught" stopping, including a particularly big bright one to the car park (if they'd had that before there's absolutely no chance we'd have missed it...). I'm thinking of querying with Leeds Bradford aiport directly to see when they put that sign up for the car park, if it was them who did it.

If you are absolutely sure that these new signs were installed after the date of your incident, then you will be highlighting that fact in your WS as evidence that the claimant must have believed that the previous signage was inadequate.

spikeycacti22

Thanks for your suggestions, I'm going to get in touch with the airport this week and try and get some clarification on the dates.

I'm back from my break and have the N180 form to complete. From reading the advice, the only bit I'm unsure about section D1: Suitability for determination without a hearing. I understand that a hearing is preferrable, but it appears they are looking for a justified reason to do it with a hearing.

I'm wondering what reason people typically put for this? Would it go against me if I left it blank and just put "No"?

VCS have got in touch saying Elms Legal are no longer representing them and looking to settle for a reduced charge. I understand this letter can just be filed away, although I will need to send any legal correspondence directly with VCS moving forward.

Thanks

KeithP

This thread - New Questions on the N180 Form - should help.

95Rollers

B789 said:

spikeycacti22 said:

My visit to the airport yesterday wasn't helpful with the case as they've added a number of new signs since I was "caught" stopping, including a particularly big bright one to the car park (if they'd had that before there's absolutely no chance we'd have missed it...). I'm thinking of querying with Leeds Bradford aiport directly to see when they put that sign up for the car park, if it was them who did it.

If you are absolutely sure that these new signs were installed after the date of your incident, then you will be highlighting that fact in your WS as evidence that the claimant must have believed that the previous signage was inadequate.

Have you tried looking at Google streetview? That might have pictures of the roadways before they were changed or closer to the date you were there 🤔  PPCs are known to like to move their signs around from my experience.