VCS at EMA -Stopping in a NO STOPPING ZONE

SumySani

Is there a timeframe between the LBC letter and when the CCJ would come.  The concern is that I'm out of the country from end of Feb to Mid April, with limited access to my emails.  Is it worth sending a reply on this LBC advising that any future correspondence will need to wait until my return.

Appreciate if you could provide any guidance on this

KeithP

Certainly do not let the Claimant know about your unavailability like that. That will have the Claimant rubbing his hands with glee and saying "oh goody, we'll send the Claim Form while he's away. Should get a default win that way".

Fruitcake

You can either,

1 Ignore the LBC and prepare for the claim form to arrive, or,

2 Respond to the LBC, deny the debt, and repeat your stance that you were not the driver, cannot be assumed to be the driver, and cannot be held liable as keeper since the site is not relevant land where byelaws apply, and prepare for the claim form to arrive, or,

3 Respond to the LBC, deny the debt but state you are seeking debt advice and require the case to be put on hold for 30 days as per court pre-action protocol, and repeat your stance that you were not the driver, cannot be assumed to be the driver, and cannot be held liable as keeper since the site is not relevant land where byelaws apply, and prepare for the claim form to arrive.

If you want to get it over with, I would suggest option 2.
If it were me, I would go for option 3 purely for buggrance factor simply because I can.


Have you pursued VCS's statement about byelaws being obsolete and only applying to the old site? I ask because this is not the first time they have claimed this, but were caught out in a lie when I challenged this exact same statement made about a PCN issued at Bristol Airport. 
I complained to my MP about this statement. He contacted the airport operator, a sub-contractor to the foreign investment companies that own the airport, who replied to him saying that they did not consider byelaws obsolete, but they were very much active.

This is the reply I received from The Right Honourable John Penrose MP after I complained about this untrue statement from VCS.

Dear Fruitcake,

Please find below a reply from Bristol Airport in response to the points that I raised on your behalf about bylaws. They write:

Firstly, our Byelaws are definitely in place and are not obsolete. We have of course contacted our third-party parking enforcement provider who have identified an issue with the wording used in the response to the constituent, which does not align with their usual communication standards. The operative used incorrect phrasing with regards to Byelaws in this particular response. Excel Parking Services have assured us that this wording anomaly is not consistent with the response typically used in other communications.

I strongly suggest you complain to your MP  and the airport landowner asap, asking if this statement by the airport sub-contractor, VCS is true.

This is the wording I used,

"Dear John Penrose,

Bristol Airport is owned by a number of foreign investment companies and managed on their behalf by a sub-contractor called Bristol Airport Limited. It is a legal requirement that airport byelaws must be in place in order for aircraft flights to occur.
I have recently discovered that according to Vehicle Control Services (VCS) Limited, a sub-contractor of the airport management company, Bristol airport Limited consider airport byelaws to be obsolete in certain parts of the airport site.

Background:
A vehicle registered keeper received an unfair parking charge notice from VCS for stopping in a no-stopping area on North Side Road within the airport boundary. The driver of this vehicle, who was not the registered keeper, was forced to stop in a queue of traffic on the 30th of June, 2023, due to a broken down bus, which was therefore completely outside the control of the driver.

This is not the issue however. During the appeal process, the registered keeper pointed out that they could not be held liable because the land is not-relevant land where airport byelaws apply as defined by Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, and only the unidentified driver could be liable.
VCS responded with, amongst other points,

"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."

It should be noted that the alleged event occurred on North Side Road, which is the main road through the airport to all car parks, close to the main terminal building and therefore not on "the old airport site." In addition, the most recent airport byelaws cover the location of the alleged event, and were produced as recently as 2012.

As a regular user of Bristol Airport, and a concerned member of your constituency who lives under the airport flightpath, please will you confirm with Bristol Airport Limited that either,

(i) Airport Byelaws are not considered obsolete and therefore their agent, Vehicle Control Services Limited have made an untrue statement,

or,

(ii) Airport Byelaws are considered obsolete, Airport regulatory bodies and the Civil Aviation Authority have been informed, and all concerned are satisfied that airport operational safety and the safety of the general public has not been compromised."

I suggest you amend the relevant parts to suit your case, and send it to the airport owner/landholder, and your MP. On the complaint to your MP, strongly suggest her/he contacts John Penrose MP who first exposed this lie.

I have found this site useful for the latter,

WriteToThem - Email your Councillor, MP, MSP, MS, MLA or London Assembly Member for free

DJH1979

Hi All

Newbie here, trying to find out the best course of action.

I have found this thread whilst searching for some information and advice to this exact issue, I have been sent a CN for pulling up in a "no stopping" zone outside EMA, I was stationary for a matter of seconds whilst I took my phone from my pocket to check the address of my intended destination. I have appealed the CN stating that I was only stationary for a few seconds and the photographic evidence they have supplied with the CN this as you can see my vehicle pulling away from the area in the last photo. They has declined this appeal and said I can appeal to IAS which from the various articles I have now read seems to be a futile effort anyway, what is my next course of action as I really do not feel that a £60/£100 fine is justified for a few second stop on a foggy Sunday morning where there was virtually no other traffic around.

Many Thanks

Darren

Coupon-mad

Just read the Newbies thread.

No link.

  

DJH1979

Coupon-mad said:

Just read the Newbies thread.

No link.

  

Thankyou, I have just scanned through and there is a LOT of info, an overwhelming amount in fact, I am very unsue about what I am reading to be honest. Would your advice be to contact EMA directly and request them to adjucicate, sorry for asking what may seem obvious to you but as said there is a lot of info on the newbie thread.

nopcns

@DJH1979, please start your own thread if you have questions about your situation, even if it is similar to this one. It makes it almost impossible to deal with two separate individuals in one thread. If you have identified yourself as the driver in your appeal, then you really do need your own thread as you will have thrown away the easiest defence.

Half_way

@DJH1979 EMA will not adjudicate - you need to start your own thread: tip try a username that doesnt look like it could be your initials followed by a date of birth , if its not your Date of birth and/or initials then carry on, if it is start on here with a new account.

 

As for the airport no stopping cases, these need to highlight to the Parking company that these areas are covered with by-laws and as such are not relevant land so they can not hold the registered keeper liable (unless the registered keeper informs them of who was driving )

If the parking company reply's with the by-laws are obsolete then this must be noted and posted on here.

So:

•  Username DJH1979 should not be anything to do with your name or date of birth
• Make sure you mention that its not relevant land By-laws are in force
  
• Never say or guess as to who could have been driving, not on here ( a publicly viewable forum) to the airport, or to the parking company
• start a new thread as this is for a separate case, and you don't want to get your wires crossed
  

SumySani

Just a quick update.
Since replying to the LBC letter in February and sending in all the documents which were uploaded during the appeal and a copy of the licence with the photo of the registered keeper who is apparently the passenger, I have not had no further correspondence as of now.

Is it possible that the case has now been dropped ?

Grizebeck

Hopefully