Permit at work VCS DCB Legal court claim

Kitkat8

Hello all, 
I tried for 3 days to find an answer but I have ASD and so really struggled.
 There are x2 incidences here.
One occasion a PCN was not out on the windscreen and so the driver did not realise they had a fine. A notice to keeper was delivered to the keeper of the car on the same date as the notice to keeper of the following incident. Unfortunately no photographic evidence was taken as the driver was unaware they had a PCN.

The next day a PCN was on the windscreen following the drivers shift. 

Basically at the drivers workplace they are required by a private landowner to have a permit to park in the carpark directly outside their workplace. The permit fell off the windscreen due to the tax disk holder falling into the footwell as it lost its stick some time following the drivers shift start at 8am.

I have made an appeal and read the newbie posts but I'm still a bit confused on what to do when they inevitabley reject the appeal! 

A notice to keeper was sent for both occasions within 15 days.

Here is the appeal that has been sent:

'I decline your invitation to name the driver, which is not required of me as the keeper of the vehicle. I will not be paying your demand for payment for the following reasons:

The charge sought is not a valid, genuine pre-estimate of loss – because the permit was already paid for. Even in the case of the vehicle being parked without ‘displaying’ a valid permit (which is denied), the fact remains that a valid permit is in place for the vehicle, and no financial or other loss has occurred to either the landowner or PPC. Therefore the charge sought is invalid.

The alleged contravention did not occur. The contravention is for a permit not being displayed in the vehicle. However, as shown in the attached evidence the permit is displayed in the vehicle. It was originally on the windscreen and unfortunately fell into the footwell after the driver had started their shift. Although the permit is in the footwell it is still displayed faced upwards and can clearly be seen by looking in the passenger window as shown I’m the photos provided.

There was insufficient signage. The unremarkable and obscure signs were not seen by the driver, are in very small print and the terms are not readable to drivers. The signs in this car park are not prominent, clear or legible from all parking spaces and the notice of the parking charge is in small print. There is nothing at all on the signage which states a contract is formed or implied by parking at the location as you can see by the attached photographic evidence provided by yourself.

Mitigating circumstances. The tax disk holder which secured the permit to the windscreen became unstuck sometime after the drivers shift started at 8am. The tax disk holder no longer being sticky is evidenced in a video.

The driver was authorised to park on site with a valid permit. The permit was displayed inside a tax disk holder. The permit was still visible as displayed in the photos on the passenger side floor. A video has also been uploaded showing the driver attempting to put the tax disk holder back onto the windscreen after being notified of the parking charge showing that it has lost its stickiness. The driver is a valid permit holder.  

If you choose to pursue me please be aware that I will not enter into any correspondence and this will be the only correspondemce you will receive from me until you answer the specific points raised.

Yours faithfully,'

I'm just unsure of the next steps to take honestly to appeal if it is rejected

Coupon-mad

Oh dear.  Where did you get that appeal?  It's not the one in the NEWBIES thread and half of that is rubbish or out of date.

Which PPC?

Kitkat8

Hi the one in the newbies thread I couldn't find anything specific to permits. It didn't make sense when I put it down to do with paying or overstaying or anything that was on there. It all felt like if I sent that it wouldn't have made any sense so I looked at all the advice given on threads for permits and used the most recent up to date stuff to make my own

Kitkat8

Also it says about them sending photos but these were all provided on the NTK with a link to view the photos of the drivers 'contravention'. So it all didn't really make sense for me to send

Fruitcake

Kitkat8 said:

Also it says about them sending photos but these were all provided on the NTK with a link to view the photos of the drivers 'contravention'. So it all didn't really make sense for me to send

What you don't know is if there are more photos than the ones on the NTK and the ones available from the link. There may well be more they have failed to show which is why you should always ask for them to be provided.

We do need to know the name of the PPC.

Kitkat8

Sorry its VCS Vehicle Control Solutions

Kitkat8

It didn't make sense in my situation. It was permit not an overstay. I don't understand. My appeal has been rejected. Shock. I've got the option to appeal to IAS or pay the fine

Coupon-mad

It's not a fine.

Do not appeal to the IAS because it is not considered a competent appeals service and will be replaced by the Government this year.

Do nothing. Do not pay.

This is all made clear already in NEWBIES PLEASE READ THESE FAQS FIRST. 

Kitkat8

Sorry I have ASD. I tried to look through the information but just found it all really confusing. I didn't understand it very well. Sorry. So do I just ignore all the letters they are going to send me?

KeithP

Kitkat8 said:

Sorry I have ASD. I tried to look through the information but just found it all really confusing. I didn't understand it very well. Sorry. So do I just ignore all the letters they are going to send me?

And I'm sorry to say that I don't understand ASD at all.

However, don't these two short sentences help?...

Coupon-mad said:

Do nothing. Do not pay.

Coupon-mad

Obviously DON'T ignore a court claim.