VCS Letter Before Claim

Milliered

Also,I have noticed it states on the LBC that they will not accept service of documents by email!
Am I to ignore that or am I just becoming what they want me to be,daunted by it all?

Coupon-mad

You aren't serving any documents. Just send the email based on what we suggested.  Including the words about the 30 day hold for debt advice.

Milliered

Hi Coupon-Mad and Fruitcake.
Have sent a long response to the LBC using both of your text.
Made a lot of sense when all put together so I thank you for your incredible knowledge and patience.
Sent it via the two email addresses(got back generic replies stating can't use email etc).
Just sit and wait for their reply then?
In the meantime I will get to complaining to East mids airport/landowner and MP.
Many thanks

Milliered

Hello,hope you are all well.
Following on from my reply to the LBC,in which I requested the further 30 days,I have received this letter from ELMS legal.
Is this the standard procedure? And is it worth me phoning them to further dispute the alleged debt? Or just ignore?
Many thanks

Coupon-mad

Normal - search the forum for it discussed.

Milliered

Hello folks,hope you are well.
Back again as I have now received the dreaded Claim Form!
Issued on the 5 th March and I acknowledged service on the 12th March which was confirmed next day.
Am just about to start drafting up the defence and have read the defence template that is posted.
However,I already have a question I'm afraid.
In the first paragraph it states: It is denied that any conduct by the driver was in breach of any term.

Reason I query this is that I am defending this case as I was not the driver but I am the registered keeper.
Should I still just follow the wording that is in the opening paragraph?
For the LBC form,I literally used all the wording that was kindly advised in the previous reply( Coupon-Mad and Fruitcake).
Should I just use that text again in paragraph 3 as it referred more to the legal arguments such as previous cases and bylaws etc. ?
Or Is that paragraph purely to just explain the circumstances of why the car was there,rather than if there was an infringement?
I will upload a photo of the NTK also as ,although it doesn't state anything about PoFA21, it does state that the driver is liable for the charge but then at the bottom claims that ,as the registered keeper,I may be pursued on the assumption that I was the driver!
Which is precisely what I thought was not a legal route.
Any help would be much appreciated
Thank you

Milliered

Please find attached photos of the NTK

nopcns

You are defending what is claimed in the PoC on the claim form. Please show us the claim form suitably redacted. I will hazard a guess that the PoC make no mention of anything more than the fact that the driver breached a contractual term.

In the defence paragraph that you edit to your circumstances, you are answering the woefully inadequate PoC and you simply state that you were not the driver and put the Claimant to strict proof otherwise. As the keeper, the Defendant cannot be liable because the land where the alleged breach of contract occurred is under statutory control which means the Claimant can only hold the driver liable. There is no legal requirement for the keeper to identify the driver, whether they know the identity or not and no inference can be made or assumed that the keeper was also the driver as will be evidenced in the persuasive appeal court judgment of VCS v Edward [H0KF6C9C] 2023.

Coupon-mad

Search the forum for:

VCS Edward Smith Gargan

You will find the requisite wording for a defence already written dozens of times in 2023.

Milliered

Hello nopcn
Thank you for your reply.
Here is where I am a little confused then as in the earlier response from others, I thought I was advised to use the same text that I used in the LBC going forward,which was quite long and complex.
Sorry,but not very clued up on this stuff,even though I have read through all the newbie info.
Here is the Claim Form you requested. Any advice would be much appreciated