Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • upstanding
    • By upstanding 6th Jul 19, 2:43 PM
    • 57Posts
    • 49Thanks
    upstanding
    VCS parking in restricted area & claim from from CCBC
    • #1
    • 6th Jul 19, 2:43 PM
    VCS parking in restricted area & claim from from CCBC 6th Jul 19 at 2:43 PM
    Hi hoping you can point me in right direction. Have received claim form from CCBC Northampton in relation to 'fine' from 2015 issued by VCS. Have completed AOS (papers issued 21.6).Did not receive anything other than a demand for payment letter some nearly 3 months later which we did not respond to followed by other several demands for payment.
    Is it too late to submit SAR to VCS now for any evidence they claim to have ?- states parked in restricted area of car park - but car was parked on road outside of car park along with several others, who parked there on daily basis as no parking restrictions in place. Or should I just try to compile defence. Have been reading newbies thread many times over last week but unsure as to specific details we need to put due to their claim of restricted area? Any advice gratefully appreciated, thanks
Page 2
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 7th Jul 19, 6:00 PM
    • 16,757 Posts
    • 20,135 Thanks
    KeithP
    Is this where you mean?...
    .
    • Egbert Nobacon
    • By Egbert Nobacon 7th Jul 19, 6:32 PM
    • 274 Posts
    • 476 Thanks
    Egbert Nobacon
    Yes MonkeyRum the Defendant may not have been the Driver but it will be the Defendant arguing this in court.

    Take bargepole’s word for it - he has the legal training.
    • upstanding
    • By upstanding 7th Jul 19, 11:59 PM
    • 57 Posts
    • 49 Thanks
    upstanding
    Thank you for taking time to look - You've got it, exactly - further back where the lines start, closer to where you can see the people on the right of the shot.

    Just in process of doing SAR to VCS -we no longer own the vehicle but i have a copy of V5C/3 (section that is completed when you sell vehicle) it only states registration number not keepers name - would that suffice or do you have to provide copy documentation of some sort with name and address on it? Also can you clarify that I have followed right protocol - that I need to ask for ALL data held including copy of PCN, NTK (which we never received) any photos taken by them along with copies of any letters and state they have to reply within one month.
    Thanks again everybody
    • Snakes Belly
    • By Snakes Belly 8th Jul 19, 6:19 AM
    • 764 Posts
    • 1,111 Thanks
    Snakes Belly
    As you enter into Miller's Lane from Derby Street the car park on your right is leased to Excel Parking Services Limited. VCS and Excel are owned by the same people however they are legally separate entities.

    Both myself and another poster have fallen foul of the Derby Street car park and have gone through the court process. Keep Calm and Carry On has received a another claim similar to what you have received.

    Keep Calm won the first claim relating to the Derby Street car park with costs awarded and I had to pay a very minimal amount to the PPC with no costs to either party.

    Problem is that until the SAR's are received no one knows exactly what they are dealing with because it's from 2015.

    I did take a look at where Keep Calm thinks that the car may have been parked and there are no yellow lines in 2016.

    These two PPC's are very litigious and if these claims had real merit they would have been on to this much more quickly. It could be that they are just trying their luck before the new CoP comes into practice.
    Last edited by Snakes Belly; 08-07-2019 at 6:49 AM.

    Nolite te bast--des carborundorum.
    • Snakes Belly
    • By Snakes Belly 8th Jul 19, 6:42 AM
    • 764 Posts
    • 1,111 Thanks
    Snakes Belly
    Further to my post I took a look at google maps and the date of the image changes from 2018 to 2016 when you turn left by the Travelodge (still in Miller's lane on the Lidl side). Albion Bathroom Store is on your right. At that point the image captured date changes to 2016 and there are no yellow lines.

    You need to take some screen shots of this and try to include the part of Miller's Lane where you were parked from this angle (2016 capture). You can see this and when you enlarge the image you can tell that there are no yellow lines.
    Last edited by Snakes Belly; 08-07-2019 at 8:05 AM.

    Nolite te bast--des carborundorum.
    • Snakes Belly
    • By Snakes Belly 8th Jul 19, 7:00 AM
    • 764 Posts
    • 1,111 Thanks
    Snakes Belly
    The sign on Miller's lane relates to the Excel Car Park not VCS. There are no yellow lines when you parked in 2015.

    Nolite te bast--des carborundorum.
    • Snakes Belly
    • By Snakes Belly 8th Jul 19, 8:23 AM
    • 764 Posts
    • 1,111 Thanks
    Snakes Belly
    Switcheroo alert.

    Look at the street view for Miller's lane where you were parked and change the dates on the street view in the top box you will see that there are VCS signs in 2016 but later there are Excel signs. The lease is definitely in the name of Excel.

    The sign at the entrance is also in the name of Excel whilst also displaying VCS signs?. I am a bit confused at what is going on here. The entrance sign is Excel. The lease is owned by Excel. The sign is VCS and the claim is VCS.

    https://www.google.com/maps/@52.8074937,-1.6424548,3a,75y,147.19h,86.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5qMsqnmNpBCg5etoz6zvfQ!2e0!7i1 3312!8i6656
    Do you think that the driver may have had a wheel on the cobbles? I think that the cobbled bit is part of Excel's car park.
    Last edited by Snakes Belly; 08-07-2019 at 8:43 AM.

    Nolite te bast--des carborundorum.
    • Snakes Belly
    • By Snakes Belly 8th Jul 19, 9:50 AM
    • 764 Posts
    • 1,111 Thanks
    Snakes Belly
    Switcheroo alert.
    The sign at the entrance is also in the name of Excel whilst also displaying VCS signs?. I am a bit confused at what is going on here. The entrance sign is Excel. The lease is owned by Excel. The sign is VCS and the claim is VCS.
    [.
    Originally posted by Snakes Belly
    I am a bit out of my depth here. If the car park is leased by Excel and has an Excel sign at the entry and in the main car park but some VCS signs on the perimeter (which were later changed to Excel) is the NTK from VCS invalid?

    Nolite te bast--des carborundorum.
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 8th Jul 19, 9:56 AM
    • 5,359 Posts
    • 6,805 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    it isnt "invalid"
    Its just they have no standing t claim, as any alleged contract - given by the signs on view - is with excel. No contratc could have been formed with VCS.

    If there is a mix of signs then there would be judgement as to which prevails, but having a multitude of differieng signs with differnet egal entities, each purporting to create a single contract for hte single act of parking would cause its own issues for the PPCs involved; you cannot possibly contratc with both entities in 2 contracts for hte same offer of parking.
    • Snakes Belly
    • By Snakes Belly 8th Jul 19, 10:08 AM
    • 764 Posts
    • 1,111 Thanks
    Snakes Belly
    I think what has happened (difficult without SAR) is that the car park borders the road and there is no demarcation other than cobbles. The VCS signs say no parking which I think means that they can't park on the cobbles. The road at the time has no yellow lines. The entrance to the car park has an Excel sign and all the other signs on the car park are Excel. It's just the perimeter that are VCS no parking signs. There are no yellow lines at this time and people seem to park on the road. My intuition is that if they edge onto the cobbles they get a ticket from VCS although the land is leased by Excel.

    I have had issues with this car park which is why I try to help others that have been caught out by a nightmare of a place.
    Last edited by Snakes Belly; 08-07-2019 at 10:11 AM.

    Nolite te bast--des carborundorum.
    • upstanding
    • By upstanding 8th Jul 19, 5:08 PM
    • 57 Posts
    • 49 Thanks
    upstanding
    Hi SNAKES, thinking your intuition may be right - looking closely at our own photo from the time it could be argued that tyre 'may have been' encroaching the cobbles - so not sure whether it would come down to that or how clear any pictures VCS might have. Interestingly where the No Parking sign had been there is a now another sign (blue & Yellow) stating Caution in times of wintery conditions, again in the cobbles and not within the car park so if Excel are trying to warn people they have a funny way of doing so because nobody from WITHIN the carpark would be able to read the sign given that it faces out onto the ROAD!! another bit of factual information is that the patrol person monitoring this area wears a high visibility jacket with VCS emblazoned on the back yet the car park is owned by Excel -don't know what it says on the tickets they issue now - one wonders are they being issued on behalf of VCS or Excel - simply more confusion to add to the pot
    • Snakes Belly
    • By Snakes Belly 8th Jul 19, 11:54 PM
    • 764 Posts
    • 1,111 Thanks
    Snakes Belly
    They are issued on behalf of Excel in the car park ( I had one). Excel have a lease on that land. I have the details from the land registry if you need them. The sign at the entry to the car park is an Excel Sign as are the signs in the car park.

    The reason why they put those VCS signs up is that at the time Excel were with BPA and VCS were with IPC and appeals to IAS are weighted in favour of the PPC.

    There were no double yellow lines at the time of your incident or any demarcation between the road and their car park. You would not have disadvantaged anyone parking on the car park.
    Last edited by Snakes Belly; 11-07-2019 at 7:22 AM.

    Nolite te bast--des carborundorum.
    • Snakes Belly
    • By Snakes Belly 9th Jul 19, 11:03 AM
    • 764 Posts
    • 1,111 Thanks
    Snakes Belly
    The local council responsible for Millers Lane is East Staffordshire District Council which is a District Council and the local parish council is Shobnall Civil Parish.
    If you were on the road before the yellow lines I can't see what you were doing wrong unless you had slightly encroached onto Excel's (Not VCS'S) car park. You could not have disadvantaged another motorist.

    There is a doctrine of de minimis which means that the claim is that trivial it should not be bought to court. It is a trivial matter if you were just slightly encroached on their land especially as there are no demarcation lines.

    There is also the question of the fact that you are being sued by VCS but the land where the so called transgression took place is leased to Excel. I have cast iron proof of that and they are separate entities.

    Nolite te bast--des carborundorum.
    • upstanding
    • By upstanding 9th Jul 19, 7:37 PM
    • 57 Posts
    • 49 Thanks
    upstanding
    Thank you so much for sharing - you have a wealth of information - would certainly appreciate copy details of the land registry etc and anything else you feel would be appropriate to include and highlight etc. The doctrine of de minimis is certainly interesting so another very valid point - presuming this is something I can make reference to in the defence along with pointing out that the "supposed charge" should then have been issued by Excel and not VCS? Keep Calm has also been very helpful offering support - it really is a mine field.
    • upstanding
    • By upstanding 9th Jul 19, 7:44 PM
    • 57 Posts
    • 49 Thanks
    upstanding
    Hi Snakes just tried personal messaging you but message didn't go as you have no space in your quota to receive any more!!
    • Snakes Belly
    • By Snakes Belly 10th Jul 19, 12:43 AM
    • 764 Posts
    • 1,111 Thanks
    Snakes Belly
    I have quite a full inbox because I have been keeping messages in relation to my own case which was/is open to appeal by the PPC. I will clear a couple out and send you the Land Registry details.

    I am not a regular on this forum or have any legal training however Keep Calm and myself have both fought claims in this car park from Excel at different courts.
    Last edited by Snakes Belly; 10-07-2019 at 12:46 AM.

    Nolite te bast--des carborundorum.
    • upstanding
    • By upstanding 10th Jul 19, 3:45 PM
    • 57 Posts
    • 49 Thanks
    upstanding
    Thanks would be great if you could so i can drop you a query if you wouldn't mind and would really appreciate land registry details also.
    • Snakes Belly
    • By Snakes Belly 11th Jul 19, 2:46 AM
    • 764 Posts
    • 1,111 Thanks
    Snakes Belly
    I have copied and pasted the Land Registry entry in a PM.

    Probably best if you could post on here as I need to keep the stuff in my PM's until I am sure that the PPC will not appeal. They are now past the time for appeal however the Court is very behind with administration. I am waiting for them to come back to me to confirm whether or not the PPC has appealed.

    Regarding your defence and WS you will need to post on the board for the regulars to check over.

    Nolite te bast--des carborundorum.
    • upstanding
    • By upstanding 12th Jul 19, 9:10 PM
    • 57 Posts
    • 49 Thanks
    upstanding
    Hi thanks SB for details on land registry - I'm trying to decipher whether ESBC still owns the road or whether that transferred over to MIllbrook in 2011 - or whether right of way is still with ESBC given that their depot is there along with access to units and railway car park and hotel etc - one can only assume it is a PUBLIC highway. I don't have access to the plan so difficult to envisage exactly other than thinking red area specifically highlights the car park in front of Travelodge where Excel assert their perceived authority.
    My question to all forum members is this: PCN stated car parked in one of the business units, the court claim form states this being units1-4 (which no longer exist) but car was not parked within the unit it was on Opposite side of the Road. No Notice to Keeper was ever received -just demand for payment some months later.
    As I have not been able to upload copy of CC form it states:
    Amount Claimed 160.00. Court Fee 25.00 Legal representatives costs 0.00 - Total amount 185.00
    Should defence then focus on incorrect details, abuse of process (demanding extra 60) an no contract entered into, VCS suing despite car park area governed by Excel, along with all the ambiguous signage.
    Snakes did mention about possibility of tyre being on cobbled area - but again as he states there was no clear demarcation - kind of hoping that if parking charge notice is completed incorrectly then there is no case to answer - any helpful comments would be appreciated
    • Snakes Belly
    • By Snakes Belly 13th Jul 19, 10:12 AM
    • 764 Posts
    • 1,111 Thanks
    Snakes Belly
    Any news on the SAR yet?

    Nolite te bast--des carborundorum.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

3,608Posts Today

8,899Users online

Martin's Twitter