Charge Notice for stopping at red light - Bristol Airport

Coupon-mad

Good fightback!

LDast

Coupon-mad said:

Good fightback!

Thank you. 

This is the sum total of the "contract" provided:

https://imgur.com/a/R0i2Oa3

Coupon-mad

LDast said:

Coupon-mad said:

Good fightback!

Thank you. 

  
  
  
      

Drivad

Might be nothing, but I note that DCBLegal use the BPA's Approved Operator logo in their written correspondence, and they've used the BPA's Code of Practice to justify the fees of £70 (and the lack of VAT thereon). 

VCS is registered with the IPC, not the BPA. I emailed the BPA to clarify what was happening here, and they've advised me that "In this instance, DCBL will be following the IPC’s Code of Practice. If the Parking Charge was issued by a member of our Approved Operator Scheme, DCBL would follow our Code of Practice."

So DCBLegal are using the Code of Practice from an entirely unrelated organisation (with branded materials to back it up) in order to try and get me to pay up. At best, this is incompetent, but is this anything we could hold them to? I'm sure if I started emailing them with a royal crest in my signature there would be some sort of consequence. 

Fruitcake

Drivad said:

Might be nothing, but I note that DCBLegal use the BPA's Approved Operator logo in their written correspondence, and they've used the BPA's Code of Practice to justify the fees of £70 (and the lack of VAT thereon). 

VCS is registered with the IPC, not the BPA. I emailed the BPA to clarify what was happening here, and they've advised me that "In this instance, DCBL will be following the IPC’s Code of Practice. If the Parking Charge was issued by a member of our Approved Operator Scheme, DCBL would follow our Code of Practice."

So DCBLegal are using the Code of Practice from an entirely unrelated organisation (with branded materials to back it up) in order to try and get me to pay up. At best, this is incompetent, but is this anything we could hold them to? I'm sure if I started emailing them with a royal crest in my signature there would be some sort of consequence. 

It is incompetence. It is not a killer point, but one that should still be mentioned if/when it gets to court. It shows lack of due diligence on the part of the professional legal company. 

More important points are the absence of a contract with the landowner, and that the contract they had with the landowner's sub-contractor expired on the 6th of January 2023. To date, VCS have yet to produce a copy of a contract with or flowing from the landowner, and have yet to provide a copy of a document to prove their contract with BA Ltd was extended or renewed after on or after January 2023.

Then you've got byelaws, not relevant land, not the driver, and no keeper liability to throw in as well.

Coupon-mad

I don't think it matters, given the fake fee is set at £70 by both Trade Bodies and they've now invented what we and motoring groups call a disingenuous pile of crap 'joint Code' anyway.

Drivad

Got a follow up from The Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2024/sep/14/airport-parking-fines-bristol-unenforceable-bylaw?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Coupon-mad

Drivad said:

Got a follow up from The Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2024/sep/14/airport-parking-fines-bristol-unenforceable-bylaw?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

This is interesting, reportedly said by smarmy Derek, the BPA's pet rent-a-speeding-fine-loophole-lawyer:

"Derek Millard-Smith, the approved solicitor to the British Parking Association and its members, of which VCS is not one, said the ability of the parking firm to enforce these civil demands will probably depend on whether the roads in question are part of the zone that is governed by the airport’s bylaws.

Millard-Smith, a partner at JMW Solicitors, said he had not been asked to examine Bristol’s situation so was unable to offer an opinion."

Fruitcake

I've emailed a copy of the (out of date) VCS contract to the reporter who wrote the article, and offered to provide more info' if he wants it.

The_Slithy_Tove

Drivad said:

Hi all, quick update.

I received a Letter of Claim from DCB Legal yesterday.

Who has actually received the Letter of Claim? The driver or the registered keeper? Who appealed in the first place? It seems they (should) know who the driver was, given the Guardian article, so they can pursue the driver if they're bright enough (and avoid the fact that POFA doesn't apply for multiple reasons).