VCS - Leeds Bradford - Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited

loge

Dear MoneySavingExpert Forum 

I though that I ought to provide an update on my case.  VCS v Scott (now dismissed).

I had a conciliation in the Havant Court in Nov-23. The Claimant (VCS) were represented by a law school graduate who had gained rights of audience (CILEx).  The Conciliator read through the Claim and Defence.  When asked whether his client was prepared to settle, he stated that his client would accept the amount due £205 (Claim £170 plus court fees £30), without claiming the £50 Legal Representative's costs.  I didn't accept and the matter didn't settle.

We then proceeded to trial on 14-Feb-24, at Portsmouth Combined Court.

At trial VCS were represented by a barrister.  The Claimant's witness did not attend.

My case was fairly straight forward.  I had had no idea that I was on private property.  The visible "no stopping" signage appeared to signal a continuation of the "red route" on the adopted highway and I had no opportunity to stop and read and acquaint myself with the signage / terms and conditions (VCS v Crutchley).
I had been obliged to stop as I was not able to enter into the short stay car parking, which had a height restriction of 1.9m, as I had a roofbox on the car.  I stopped on the road whilst I tried to establish how to safely exit the "airport loop", as every exit on the road "Meet & Greet", "Pickup & Drop Off" had a similar height restriction.

VCS provided in its Claim a statement as to the adequacy of its signage and Exhibits showing the many, large signs. 

The judge observed that I had been driving at 0700 on 31-December.  That it was dark and the Claimant's Exhibits, showing the car 'stopped', showed that it was dark.  However, the Claimant's Exhibits of the signage were all taken in broad daylight and there was no evidence that they were adequately illuminated.  As the Claimant's witness was not in attendance, there was no opportunity for cross-examination.

The judge concluded that the Claimant failed to prove its case on the balance of probabilities.

As it was a "no stopping" case, the barrister was instructed to seek leave to appeal.  The judge declined to grant leave to appeal.

I had applied for costs on the basis that the Claimant's conduct was "unreasonable".  However, (unsurprisingly) my application for costs was not granted.

Debszzzz2

Well done on winning the case. What happened about the counterclaim? Did you manage to get it dropped?

Coupon-mad

This will be almost identical to the thread @spikeycacti22 (Mar-23), there are many similarities - except VCN haven't made a satisfactory offer to settle.

Now, I'm no vigilante, but this has got me sufficiently aggravated that I thought I'd share it on the forum.  Maybe, even, get some advice! 

I, too, have been issued a court claim from VCS for “Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited” at Leeds Bradford Airport.

On the day in question (late Dec-22), I drove to Leeds Bradford Airport to park in the Short Stay car park, but found, on arrival, that I couldn't get in to the car park - it had a height restriction (1.9m) and I had a roof box on top of an X-5.  So, I had to reverse out of the car park access.  I moved out of the way of the car park access, to ensure it wasn't obstructed, drew forward and stopped, to identify how and where to exit the "airport loop".  The Meet & Greet and the Pick Up & Drop Off all had similar height restrictions.  The shuttle bus & taxi lane have a barrier, with no intercom.  It's not straightforward!

It was this "stopping" whilst trying to identify the a safe route out of the "airport loop" that I have been issued a FCN.

Now, this all occurred at 0700 on a wet, dark late-December morning.

I knew that it was a "Red Route."  The Red Route starts at the Harrogate Road roundabout and there are "double red lines" and "Red Route" signs all the way.  It's well marked.

What I didn't know was that I was entering "private land". When? Where?

Does it make a difference? I think so. I had no idea that this wasn't a public road.  Could I possibly enter a contract under such circumstances?  Consensus Ad Idem, et al.

Picture1: Leeds Bradford, 2023, Whitehouse Lane & Airport Loop


I now, having been told so by VCS and after some private research, understand that the "airport loop" is private land;  the "Whitehouse Lane" from the Harrogate Road to Scotland Road is "adopted highway".  It has "split status" (Leeds.gov.uk Street Register, Street Reference Number 23013441). 

So, is it a Red Route?  Are VCS enforcing on behalf or the Council?  Well: "No!"

The Red Route Clearway was approved by Leeds Council in 2019.  Whilst this is reported to be "for Whitehouse Lane, the access route, and other roads adjacent to Leeds Bradford Airport"(1), it is in fact for Whitehouse Lane, Victoria Avenue, Warren House Lane and Harrogate Road (only the adopted part of the highway) and not the "airport loop".  

Note 1. Source: Wharfedale Observer, News, 18-Feb-2019

Picture2: Red Route Clearway, Diagram, Leeds City Council, Reference: D4740

What appears strange, is that, if the 'traffic authority' can impose parking restrictions, with the consequent yellow [red] lines, on any road open to the public — which includes un-adopted highways(2), why did the Council not extend the Red Route to include the "airport loop".

Note 2. Source: :Lodders, can-local-highway-authorities-manage-non-publicly-maintainable-highways, 19-Mar-2020

It appears that Leeds Bradford Airport have, themselves, introduced "red lines" markings that mimic the "red route" and signs that resemble the highways agency signs on the "airport loop", the private road.

All very confusing!

In fact, the junction is so confusing, that I have submitted a "Report a problem with a road marking" to Leeds City Council.  It would seem more appropriate for the "private road" to be demarcated from the "adopted highway" with a series of " -  -  -  - " dashed road markings as is required by Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 and set out in the Traffic Signs Manual (the Manual), 2018, Chapter 5, Road Markings.

What is interesting, is that the original road markings (Google Earth, 2003) show the lines as might be expected by the Manual (see: Picture 3).

Picture3: Leeds Bradford, 2003, Whitehouse Lane & Airport Loop, Google Earth Pro


However, by 2006, the road markings had changed (see: Picture 4).

Picture4: Leeds Bradford, 2006, Whitehouse Lane & Airport Loop, Google Earth Pro


The result is that there is no indication, by way of road marking, that a road user is entering "private land".

I am hoping to understand why this was changed.  It seems strange that the road markings are such, but the council / traffic authority clearly are only taking responsibility for the "adopted highway".

Private Land
It all appears to come down to a matter of "private land" and "private contract".

I have been back to Leeds Bradford, in daylight, and walked the road.  There are signs on either side of the junction, as the road proceeds up to the airport on the "airport loop", which look like highways agency road signs. 

Picture5: Leeds Bradford, Whitehouse Lane & Airport Loop, Photo, Jul-23


However, at 0700 in the morning, in the wet and the dark, driving on a "Red Route", I wasn't stopping to read the signs, that seemingly repeated other "Red Route" restrictions.  And I certainly didn't get to the point that I understood that the "private property" related to the road, rather than the airport generally, or the parking areas behind the signs.

SO,

Although I had the awareness that I might be prosecuted under the Highway Code, in a Magistrates Court, or issued with a fine for stopping on a "red route".  I had no idea that I was, half way down the "split status" road, transitioning to a private road, and now agreeing to pay a penalty to a private company, if I stopped.  I certainly had no opportunity to "accept, reject or negotiate terms."  

I have had some advice.  Mostly, "just pay up".  But from one barrister friend, that "if a contract was formed, it would be reasonable to imply a condition that the driver could stop if unable to continue."

The main point is, perhaps, did [VCS] do enough to bring the "offer" of a contract to my attention?  No road markings!  Indistinguishable signs & road markings to the adopted highway! Was the contract fair?  Opportunity to accept, decline or negotiate?

I mean, it's not a roundabout.  Is it!  I can't exactly stop and go somewhere else!

NOW,

I'm seriously aggravated.

Just like spikeycacti22, I have spent a huge amount of time explaining the incident to VCS, the Independent Appeals Service (IAS), VCS's legal agent Elms Legal Ltd, and submitting a Defence on Money Claims Online, to receive an response from VCS that they are prepared to settle if I pay £195.

I have rejected this settlement offer, but indicated a willingness to mediate.

I have told VCS, from the start, that their conduct is "unreasonable."  I just get standard letters in response to every piece of correspondence.  It's a waste of my time writing, as they don't read the letters.  Just more threatening letters, by return.  So, I informed them that I would seek to recover 'further' costs  (CPR 27.14 (2)(g)), even though it is a Small Claim for their unreasonable conduct.  I have advised that I will charge £50/hr for my time, and I have kept a log of my time for this purpose.  When I submitted my defence, I raised a counterclaim, for my wasted time.  

I understand the need to manage the access to the airport. However, the "red route" is obviously driven by LBA's desire to generate "money" charging for Pick-Up & Drop-Off.

My sense of justification only seems to get stronger by the day, as I begin to understand the deception that is being perpetrated. The pressure applied on the Council to manage "road safety" and "emergency access to the airport", to screw passengers for more money.  Not to mention the attempt to misuse the law and the legal system to extort and intimidate. 

I fear I am becoming a VIGILANTE! 

SO
If anyone has any expertise on road markings, or contract law...(or even Byelaw)
I haven't even started in the byelaws!

Regulars should bookmark this thread as the above is great information about Leeds Bradford, Whitehouse Lane & the Airport Loop.

WELL DONE loge

ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST!

SunnySayer

i got the vcs parking notice and have sent in my defence. now i have a letter saying that ELMS legal are no longer acting on their behalf?  they are still asking for me to settle £195 this is without costs as they seem to have knocked them off. i still am not going to pay and i presume i wait for a court date.  is there anything i should do in the meantime? thanks in advance

nopcns

SunnySayer said:

 is there anything i should do in the meantime?

You should start your own thread. No one is going to assist you on the back of someone else's thread.