IMPORTANT REMINDER: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information. If you are uploading images, please take extra care that you have redacted all personal information.

VCS Sheffield



  • RedxRedx Forumite
    38.1K Posts
    Eighth Anniversary 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    if you already sent them that first one its pointless doing anything else now

    just wait for their refusal and a popla code
  • Admitting you were even on the site is a NO NO.
    Leave everything for them to prove, admit nothing, send the standard soft appeal from above, you will notice it does not admit anything they are claiming is accepted.
    Be happy...;)
  • So since its pointless to send this second appeal i m not posting it, I will wait for their reply. but after i get a popla code , can i still win as i admitted i was the driver.
  • RedxRedx Forumite
    38.1K Posts
    Eighth Anniversary 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    you wont win or lose by admitting being the driver, but you have made it harder for yourself by not checking on here and sending the stroma RK letter above instead)

    to win at popla you will win on the 3 appeal points in the stroma appeal letter (actually you will win on just the one)

    so you will win on no contract, or more likely not a gpeol , possibly even on NOT RELEVANT LAND but thats another issue entirely

    I would just wait for the popla code to arrive, in the meantime draft your popla appeal up in notepad , getting it checked on here first before sending it in
  • Thanks, will wait n see what happens.I will indeed draft the popla appeal and post it on here to get it checked before sending it across.
  • Hi ,
    I have just drafted this POPLA appeal in advance (knowing My appeal would be rejected at first stage) to get sum comments before I send it across this time. I have copied it from another member on the site, thanks to them. As I have identified myself as driver I have left out no4. Point on the appeal . Any advise or comments would be highly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

    Dear POPLA Adjudicator

    RE: POPLA verfication code

    Vehicle Registration:
    PPC: Vehicle Control Services Limited
    PCN ref:
    Alleged Contravention Date:
    Date of notice:
    Alleged Contravention: Stopping on a Roadway where stopping is Prohibited.
    I am the registered Keeper of the above vehicle and I am appealingagainst above charge. I contend that I am not liable for the parking charge on thefollowing grounds and would ask that they are all considered.

    I would like to appeal this notice on the following grounds:
    1. Charge not a genuine pre-estimate of loss.

    I do not believe that any damage, obstruction or material loss wasincurred and that the charge levied is purely a fixed sum implemented inadvance by VCS as a revenue-raiser. It does not represent a genuinepre-estimate of any loss following from the incident. VCS cannot argue thatthis charge is made up of tax-deductible business costs because these wouldexist even if no cars stopped and got a ticket that day. It is alsounreasonable and unfair; an unenforceable penalty dressed up as an imaginaryloss, and as such, it breaches the Unfair Terms in Consumer ContractsRegulations 1999. If VCS believes otherwise they must be able to show a fullbreakdown of the genuine pre-estimate of loss.

    The BPA Code of Practice states:

    “19.5 if the parking charge that the driver is being asked to pay is fora breach of contract or act of trespass, this charge must be based on thegenuine pre-estimate of loss that you suffer.

    19.6 If your parking charge is based upon a contractually agreed sum,that charge cannot be punitive or unreasonable."

    POPLA Assessor Matthew Shaw has stated that the entirety of the parkingcharge must be a genuine pre-estimate of loss in order to be enforceable. Forexample, were no breach to have occurred, then the cost of parking enforcement,such as erecting signage, would still have been the same. The estimate must bebased upon loss flowing from a breach of the parking terms, and in thisinstance there was no such loss.

    2. Signage notcompliant with the BPA code of practice and not forming acontract with a driver.

    I believe the signs and any core terms VCS are relying upon were unclearin all respects. VCS needs to show POPLA their evidence and signage map/photoswhich they might contend meet all the requirements I have listed below. Thereare no low-positioned, clear signs on entry to this road which would havecommunicated the terms & conditions of stopping there to a seated driver inmoving traffic. This is a breach of the BPA Code of Practice at Appendix Bwhich sets out strict requirements for entrance signage, including ''The signshould be placed so that it is readable by drivers without their needing tolook away from the road ahead. VCS have a duty to make the terms so clear thatthey cannot be missed. To fail in this respect means that the elements of acontract have not been met. To suggest a breach of contract, VCS also needs toshow that the driver actually saw, read and accepted the terms, which theycannot do as it is clearly untrue. The idea that any driver would accept theseterms to pay this charge knowingly is perverse and beyond credibility. Thetruth is that the driver did not see, understand nor accept the alleged terms.VCS may claim that generic signage is displayed around the site but this does notmeet the BPA Code of Practice rules nor the requirements for consideration whenforming an alleged contract. It is fact impossible to read the terms andconditions of the contract without stopping.

    I would draw the assessor's attention to the 'No Stopping Zones' sectionof the Chief Adjudicator's first Annual POPLA Report 2013:

    ''Typically the motorist may have stopped on a double yellow line...ofcourse, on the public highway this is generally permitted, although not on ared route where there is a clear red line. It is therefore very important thatany prohibition is clearly marked; bearing in mind that such signage has to bepositioned, and be of such a size, as to be read by a motorist without havingto stop to look at it. Signs on red routes, unlike those indicating mostparking restrictions, are generally positioned to face oncoming traffic, ratherthan parallel to it.''

    3. Not relevant land

    Airport land is not 'relevant land' as it is already covered bystatutory bylaws and so is specifically excluded from 'keeper liability' underSchedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. As I am the registeredkeeper I am not legally liable as this Act does not apply on this land. I putthe Operator to strict proof otherwise if they disagree with this point andwould require them to show evidence including documentary proof from theAirport Authority that this land is not already covered by bylaws.

    4. No contract with landowner.

    I believe there is no contract with the landowner/occupier that entitlesthem to levy these charges and therefore VCS Ltd has no authority to issueparking charge notices (PCNs). This being the case, the burden of proof shiftsto VCS Ltd to prove otherwise so I require that VCS Ltd produce a copy of theircontract with the landowner, which must be BPA CoP compliant. This meansspecifically, that the contract must be dated before this parking event andshow that VCS Ltd are granted rights to form contracts with drivers on site andto pursue their charges in the courts in their own name.

    5. No standing to bring a claim to pursue this charge.

    I believe VCS Ltd have no standing to support pursuing a charge at thissite. Even if a basic contract is produced and mentions PCNs, the lack ofownership or assignment of title or interest in the land reduces any contractto one that exists simply on an agency basis between VCS Ltd and theowner/occupier, containing nothing that VCS Ltd can lawfully use in their ownname as a mere agent, that could impact on a third party customer. I challengeVCS Ltd to rebut this point in the light of two very recent small claimsdecisions about a parking operator with a similar contract. In ParkingEye vSharma, Case No. 3QT62646 in the Brentford County Court 23/10/2013. District JudgeJenkins dismissed the case on the grounds that the parking contract was acommercial matter between the Operator and the landowner, and didn’t create anycontractual relationship with motorists who used the land. This decision wasfollowed by ParkingEye v Gardam, Case No.3QT60598 in the High Wycombe CountyCourt 14/11/2013 where costs of £90 were awarded to the Defendant. DistrictJudge Jones concurred with the view in ParkingEye v Sharma that a parkingoperator has no standing to bring the claim in their own name. I submit thatthis applies in my case as well, especially as it was also the case in VCS Ltdv Ibbotson, Case No. 1SE09849 on 16/5/2012, where District Judge McIlwainefound as fact that only the landowner can take the matter to court and notfirms like VCS Ltd acting merely as their agents.

    I request that my appeal is upheld and the charge dismissed.

    Yours Sincerely

    Mrs xxxx xxxxxxxx
  • RedxRedx Forumite
    38.1K Posts
    Eighth Anniversary 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ok, one point to make here is that you have not bullet pointed each section before the main sections, so that the assessor can easily glance at the section headers looking for what they need

    see this example here

    also, to avoid those formatting errors when copying and pasting, paste into notepad and save first, then copy and paste from notepad onto here
  • Thanks for the advise yes, I am aware of that ,I will highlight the points when actually drafting it.
  • motto_74motto_74 Forumite
    15 Posts
    hi everyone,
    Just received a reply from VCS sheffield and as predicted they rejected my appeal. No am in the process of appealing to popla
  • motto_74motto_74 Forumite
    15 Posts
    sorry about the pevious typo , now i am in process of appealing to Popla online. anybody got any further suggestions. they said on letter if i dont pay within 14 days i have to pay full fine of £100.
This discussion has been closed.
Latest MSE News and Guides

Gin, gee-gees & groceries

This week's MSE Forum highlights

Team Blog

2for1 adult tickets to theme parks

Via selected £1-£3 Kellogg's promo packs

MSE Deals