Bristol Airport Fine - VCS

nkat_1

Hi there.

So I got a fine from VCS regarding me stopping, where stopping was prohibited within Bristol Airport.

I was dropping off some family members and at the roundabout took the wrong exit, I then U-Turned and briefly stopped to be able to change my gears back from reverse into drive after completing the manoeuvre, during this time one of those camera fine vans came up and I asked him for help in pointing me in the right direction, and he helped me.

I appeal to VCS stating the above, and I know I completely screwed up by identifying myself as the driver of the vehicle, however do I have any recourse here or should I just cough up?

Here is their response:

Re: Parking Charge Notice Number XXXXXXX

Site: Bristol Airport Post Code: BS48 3DY

Contravention Date: XXXX

We refer to your appeal in respect of the above Charge Notice (CN) received on XXXXX

Having considered the points you have raised and reviewed our records, we are unable to accept your appeal. Our main reason(s) for this decision are as follows:

The signs at the entrance to Bristol Airport and the access roads within, clearly state "No Stopping", giving clear notice that the land is private property and that a Charge of £100 will be levied if vehicles do stop. The above detailed vehicle stopped in a zone where stopping is prohibited and the driver became liable to pay that Charge.

In your appeal you have confirmed to us that on the date in question, you were the driver of the above vehicle.

Whilst we note that you have stated you were stopped as you were completing a turn in the road, this would not appear to be supported by our CCTV evidence which shows your vehicle completely stationary in the roadway.

During this time, your vehicle is not completing a manouevre and you appear to be engaging with the occupant(s) of another vehicle. In any case as stated, the signs near to the location you stopped clearly stated "No Stopping" and warned that if you did so, you were liable for the Charge displayed.

There are over 80 high profile signs advising drivers not to stop and warning that if a driver does stop, a charge of £100 is payable. The signs exceed recognised industry standards, with some as large as 2m by 1.1m (6ft 6in by 3ft 7in) which clearly state "No Stopping" alongside the nationally recognised Highway Code symbol for a Clearway (No Stopping). 

Furthermore, the signage on the approach road is reflective and positioned to face oncoming vehicles and the text size used is relative to the average approach speed of a vehicle in relation to the speed limit in force at that location.

We have fully reviewed this case and we are satisfied that the Charge Notice was correctly issued. 

We are unable to accept the mitigating circumstances raised in your representations, your appeal is therefore rejected and the Charge will stand; photographic evidence which supports this can be viewed at www.myparkingcharge.co.uk.

(The usual crap of either pay or appeal to the IAS goes here)

nkat_1

I did also pay the £7 drop off fee when I was there, so had no intention of circumventing anything but probably wouldn't help me

ChirpyChicken

no of course you dont pay VCS

nkat_1

I was more thinking in advance when it becomes a LOB etc, and IF it went to court would I lose because I was in the wrong for stopping, even if it was momentarily. 

doubledotcom

It's not a "fine". It's a speculative invoice for an alleged breach of contract by the driver from an unregulated private parking firm. Even if you identified as the driver, no contract was formed because the signs were incapable of forming one as they are prohibitive and there was no consideration.

Coupon-mad

nkat_1 said:

I was more thinking in advance when it becomes a LOB etc, and IF it went to court would I lose because I was in the wrong for stopping, even if it was momentarily. 

No, you'd win because of this entrapment:

at the roundabout took the wrong exit, I then U-Turned and briefly stopped to be able to change my gears back from reverse into drive after completing the manoeuvre, during this time one of those camera fine vans came up and I asked him for help in pointing me in the right direction, and he helped me.

He didn't. He delayed you and he let you remain stopped for longer than a mere U turn and his van (he) took the images.

I appeal to VCS stating the above, and I know I completely screwed up by identifying myself as the driver of the vehicle.

No you didn't screw up. In your case your defence is as above. Be confident.

Either ignore the IAS stage or try it, to expose that it is a complete kangaroo court. We are of the view that people should be exposing the IAS for what it is and we need more evidence for the Government.

You know (I assume) that the IPC and IAS are both owned by Uniti, all owned/controlled by Will Hurley Ltd and a couple of years ago, he also registered a commercial Ltd company called The Independent Appeals Service Ltd with himself as the sole director? Even though he also runs the trade body?

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/14994806/officers

The Ltd company is waiting in the wings as a 'dormant company' at the moment but one wonders what his plans are for it if the MHCLG fall for all this and let the IAS continue (as their proposals are unclear and it looks like this Government wants to be kick every important can down the road to rush in a bad Code):

Date (document was filed at Companies House)	Description (of the document filed at Companies House)	View / Download (PDF file, link opens in new window)
25 Jul 2025	Confirmation statementmade on 10 July 2025 with no updates	View PDF Confirmation statement made on 10 July 2025 with no updates - link opens in a new window - 3 pages(3 pages)
10 Apr 2025	Accounts for a dormant company made up to 31 July 2024	View PDF Accounts for a dormant company made up to 31 July 2024 - link opens in a new window - 2 pages(2 pages) Download iXBRL
19 Jul 2024	Confirmation statementmade on 10 July 2024 with no updates	View PDF Confirmation statement made on 10 July 2024 with no updates - link opens in a new window - 3 pages(3 pages)

Le_Kirk

The term putting the fox in charge of the hen house springs to mind!

nkat_1

He didn't. He delayed you and he let you remain stopped for longer than a mere U turn and his van (he) took the images.

He actually did not (his van was too close to actually take any pictures). The images were from a far away CCTV camera that seems to detect if vehicles are stationary, hence why I am thinking that I messed up. Though I was the one who did approach him first so I do not know if that actually changes any fact.

But I do not disagree on the fact there with you that he was "helping me", whilst in fact it was just him waiting for me to get that snap and fine.

You know (I assume) that the IPC and IAS are both owned by Uniti, all owned/controlled by Will Hurley Ltd and a couple of years ago, he also registered a commercial Ltd company called The Independent Appeals Service Ltd with himself as the sole director? Even though he also runs the trade body?


The Ltd company is waiting in the wings as a 'dormant company' at the moment but one wonders what his plans are for it if the MHCLG fall for all this and let the IAS continue (as their proposals are unclear and it looks like this Government wants to be kick every important can down the road to rush in a bad Code):

Date (document was filed at Companies House)	Description (of the document filed at Companies House)	View / Download (PDF file, link opens in new window)
25 Jul 2025	Confirmation statementmade on 10 July 2025 with no updates
10 Apr 2025	Accounts for a dormant company made up to 31 July 2024
19 Jul 2024	Confirmation statementmade on 10 July 2024 with no updates

I actually did not even know that, what an actual sham! I will still put in an appeal anyways through them just to be able to do my part with being able to get more evidence.

Thank you very much for your help @Coupon-mad, very very helpful within your response. So when I present my evidence (and they do have CCTV of me u-turning, I know they are just trying to have one saying they didn't see anything and deliberately ignoring before then). I would say it was entrapment.

Coupon-mad

nkat_1 said:

He didn't. He delayed you and he let you remain stopped for longer than a mere U turn and his van (he) took the images.

He actually did not (his van was too close to actually take any pictures). The images were from a far away CCTV camera 

He did... He just didn't take the images but he knew they were being taken by his firm.

The CCTV doesn't 'detect cars are stationary'. It's a manned CCTV camera, either watched by someone in the scammers' back office or possibly even manned & checked by him afterwards, selecting images to paint a picture. 

He deliberately arrived and (even if you approached him) instead of warning you: "hey! move, quickly because you can't stop here!" he deliberately made himself appear helpful and delayed you, staging the scene so that a U-turn became a temporary stop.

So when I present my evidence (and they do have CCTV of me u-turning, I know they are just trying to have one saying they didn't see anything and deliberately ignoring before then). I would say it was entrapment.

Yes it was. Entrapment by the van driver.