Liverpool Airport VCS

Yoyoyo77

After using this forum to do my defence /witness statements etc and it being frankly a great help there is some things I would share from my recent experience 
1 They might have not pictures but CCTV of you so while I admitted being driver anyway it could make you look silly in court 
2 The forbidding signage /moving vehicle so couldn’t enter into a contract /byelaws scenarios do not work in some cases trust me 
3 VCS are very litigious if they think they have a solid case they will pursue it to court 

There are obviously people who win but I think it is important to say there will be losers so if you can’t afford to lose just over 200 pound it is something to think on .I have no regrets but I think you hear more of the winners on here than the losers .No doubt people would say you should have done this /said this but I put a lot of research in and made all points I wanted to in court .

LDast

What are you saying? You lost in court against VCS for a PCN at LJLA? Did VCS use stills from CCTV to actually identify the driver? How? Did they stick the still image from the CCTV with the drivers face into the magical unicorn database that then spits out the identity of the person in the image?

A properly pleaded defence of no contract can be formed at LJLA because there is no contractual signage there. So, even if the driver was identified by the Keeper, the proper argument is still one of no contract formed.

Yoyoyo77

I got out of the car to let passenger out if I had said I wasn’t driver and I’m in court looking at a clear video of me that would be embarrassing .My whole argument was no contract was formed but judge rejected it .VCS are taking many people to court and being increasingly litigious do you think if it was a cut and dry case of no contract and everybody won champagne corks everywhere VCS would continue taking people to court incurring losses and costs ?? All I’m saying is there are losers and winners .The assumption that you turn up say signage doesn’t count as no contract and game over is demonstrably false .People win but you take your chances it’s not a done deal .And yes you should have done this /said this blah blah I went through this forum with a toothcomb.I wouldn’t suggest people don’t go to court as nothing would have persuaded me otherwise but you play the game you take your chances it’s not as simple as say this you win.

LDast

No, you presumed that they would be able to use the CCTV to prove you were the driver after they had gone to court. It doesn't work like that and you made a presumption that screwed half your defence.

The whole point is that you do not have to deny being the driver. You only have to make the claimant prove you were and they have to do that before you go to court in their evidence. Unless you are a famous, recognisable person, they would have absolutely no idea who the driver in the photo was unless you blab it to them, which you did!

On what basis did the judge decide that a contract was formed? I know LJLA airport very well and I know for a fact that there are no contractual signs on the way in to the airport, only forbidding signage.

Of course VCS are taking many people to court over their PCNs issued a LJLA and other locations. The gullible tree is heavy with low-hanging fruit, ripe for the picking.