Charge for stopping in traffic Bristol Airport

Boudouche1

@Fruitcake . You are right, I am responding to VCS. In order to do this, I need to press the button on myparkingcharge.co.uk called "Appeal the PCN", as I cannot reply to VCS emails (their letter says it comes from an unmonitored email, do not reply).

I therefore called my second reply to VCS an "Appeal", apologies for confusion about the wording.

Umkomaas

On any land controlled via byelaws, and therefore not falling in scope of PoFA for keeper liability (not relevant land), the last thing to be revealing to VCS is the driver's identity. 

And the bit about 'representing the driver', but having to identify the driver as a condition, is nothing more than a trap!

Fruitcake

They are not refusing a keeper appeal. They are trying to con you into thinking that though.

It changes nothing. My advice is still to wind up the old gramophone and repeat the list of all the points from your original appeal each and every time they contact you.

Have you made any further progress with your complaints?

You should add to your complaints, and complain to VCS and the IPC that the 0845 is a prohibited premium rate 'phone number, and they should not be using it for payments.

Boudouche1

OK, here is the draft response to VCS (via their "Appeal the PCN" proceess). All the comments/suggestions are welcome:

I won't be naming the driver and VCS have no right to know who it was.

As per earlier communication with VCS – reasons for appeal:

1) Frustration of contract due to a broken down vehicle preventing the driver/vehicle from moving

2) VCS own images show the queues of traffic in both directions, blocking North Side Road. Your own photos prove the case, so you are likely to lose in court.

3) VCS are not the landowner

4) VCS have no contract with or flowing from the landowner

5) VCS have no standing to issue charges

6) Stopping is not a byelaw offence

7) The wording on VCS's vehicles fails to warn motorists for what purposes covert CCTV images will be used, which is a breach of the CCTV CoP.

8) VCS are at fault for not keeping the traffic flowing/failure to manage airport road safety

9) VCS had no reasonable cause to obtain and process the registered keeper's personal data from the DVLA

Coupon-mad

Why not just say:

Further to your letter dated Date

I am not appealing 'on behalf if the driver'.

The driver will not be named.

My appeal was against any possible liability for me as the registered keeper and I thank you for confirming in writing that only the driver is liable.

I won't be bothering with the (about to be defunct) kangaroo court of IAS and I've read the DLUHC's draft IA whereby the Government has been forced to step in to address 'market failure' which I will draw to the attention of the Judge if you litigate.

I will also point out to the court that you are pursuing a keeper even though you admit there is no 'keeper liability' possible.

Further, I will expose that the DLUHC's analysis shows that the parking industry has been adding a supposed 'debt fee' that is EIGHT TIMES the minimal cost of a reminder letter/LBC (and that tiny cost is already covered either by the £100 itself or the small claims CPR-capped £50 legal reps fee).

No debt recovery fee even appears on your airport signs, so you can't claim it under contract either.  What looks to the average man on the Clapham omnibus like unconscionable price-fixing is potentially illegal (Consumer Rights Act 2015) and certainly unrecoverable.

Get lost.  Go away. Cease and desist from bothering me.  Forget Elms Legal.  Cancel the PCN as you are wasting your time and mine.

Boudouche1

Thank you @Coupon-mad . I will adjust my reply to VCS correspondingly, using the points you raised above.

Boudouche1

Thank you all fr your comments. I have now responded to VCS. I will keep yuo updated about the outcome.

YankeeBrit

If you carefully read their demand in point 1, I would just write back:

I confirm that I have notified the driver that they need to appeal to you directly within 14 days. My obligation to you as the RK is now fulfilled and I do not expect to hear back from you.

Any further correspondence in this matter will be deemed as vexatious and I will not hesitate to counterclaim for harassment should you try to progress this to a County Court claim. Furthermore, as I have complied with your request as per point #1 in your recent letter, I now expect you to remove all my personal details from your systems as per my GDPR rights.

Boudouche1

Thank you @YankeeBrit , but I ahve already submitted the reply and cannot add anything else at this point.

Boudouche1

@Fruitcake , @YankeeBrit , @Coupon-mad . Thank you for your help with the earlier appeal to VCS. I have received their reply. To sum up:

 

·        They do not accept my appeal – “No stopping” signs are clear, I have to pay £100 charge.

·        It is unclear who the driver was who was seen stopping.

·        VCS "will continue to pursue this matter on the reasonable assumption that you were the driver of the vehicle on the date in question until information/evidence to the contrary is provided".

·        Review of CCTV suggests that the vehicle stopped to drop off a passenger.

·        In response to my comment about the use of byelaws at the Airport: The airport roads are private property. Byelaws are not currently in use as the last set of byelaws published relate to the old airport site and are now regarded as obsolete by the Airport Company.

·        In response to my point about unlawful use of my data from DVLA: Parking Operators are permitted to obtain details of a vehicles registered keeper in order to pursue a lawful debt.

·        VCS are authorised to enforce parking on the Airport’s private land.

·        There are over 80 signs advising drivers not to stop.

·        The Charge Notice was correctly issued, mitigating circumstances cannot be accepted.

No further appeal to VCS is possible, need to appeal to the IAS or pay.