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
    • Beefy88
    • By Beefy88 17th Mar 18, 9:43 PM
    • 2Posts
    • 0Thanks
    Beefy88
    VCS PCN at train station...no mention of by-laws
    • #1
    • 17th Mar 18, 9:43 PM
    VCS PCN at train station...no mention of by-laws 17th Mar 18 at 9:43 PM
    Hi,
    I received the NTK following a PCN at a train station car park issued by myparkingcharge, and managed by VCS. So my understanding is that only the driver can be pursued for the fine, given the land? However on the NTK there is no mention of any of the bylaws, and includes a warning at the bottom saying 'if we do not know the driver...We will have the right to recover...any unpaid balance from you'. I can't find any reference online to find out whether this particular train station car park is different (Northfield, birmingham), but could anyone help as to whether this is exempt?
    I will be refusing to pay regardless, on unjust grounds, however want to know whether their letter is also grounds for complaint and taking further.
    Many thanks for helping!
Page 1
    • Redx
    • By Redx 17th Mar 18, 9:46 PM
    • 19,697 Posts
    • 24,978 Thanks
    Redx
    • #2
    • 17th Mar 18, 9:46 PM
    • #2
    • 17th Mar 18, 9:46 PM
    just appeal the postal notice (not the windscreen notice) using the template letter from the NEWBIES faq thread and treat it as a bylaws incident unless proved otherwise

    they have to prove their case , so just appeal , then IGNORE
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 17th Mar 18, 9:52 PM
    • 62,736 Posts
    • 75,677 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #3
    • 17th Mar 18, 9:52 PM
    • #3
    • 17th Mar 18, 9:52 PM
    I think I would add a line to the usual template appeal, asking VCS to explain the legal basis for their statement here, given that railway land is not 'relevant land':
    'if we do not know the driver...We will have the right to recover...any unpaid balance from you'
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 18th Mar 18, 9:07 AM
    • 10,254 Posts
    • 10,145 Thanks
    The Deep
    • #4
    • 18th Mar 18, 9:07 AM
    • #4
    • 18th Mar 18, 9:07 AM
    Byelaws or contract law, they are still scammers.

    This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for alleged breaches of contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors.

    Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, and another company have already been named and shamed, as has Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each year). They nearly always lose, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P.

    Hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned.

    The problem has become so rampant that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. Watch the video of the Second Reading in the HofC recently.

    http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41

    and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind most of these companies may well be put out of business by Christmas.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • Beefy88
    • By Beefy88 9th Apr 18, 6:40 PM
    • 2 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Beefy88
    • #5
    • 9th Apr 18, 6:40 PM
    • #5
    • 9th Apr 18, 6:40 PM
    Hi, I received a rejection letter to my appeal, which also failed to address the 'station land' issue. I have pasted their lengthy reply.

    We refer to your appeal in respect of the above Charge Notice (CN) received on 22/03/2018.
    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:
    We note that you have declined to name the driver of your vehicle at the time of the incident in question. It is
    important that we make you aware that in this case we may pursue you as the registered keeper of the vehicle for
    the outstanding Charge, as per Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) .
    The notice sent to you clearly states: Please be warned: that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day
    after the Issue Date of this Notice, the amount of the unpaid Parking Charge specified in this Notice has not been
    paid in full and we do not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, we will
    have the right to recover from the registered keeper, any unpaid balance of the Parking Charge. This Notice will be
    deemed to have been received by you on the second working day after the Issue Date stated above unless the
    contrary is proved.
    As members of the International Parking Community's (IPC) Accredited Operator Scheme, it is necessary for us to
    evidence to the IPC that we have relevant authority to undertake parking management at the site concerned and that
    our signs at that location are compliant in setting out the relevant terms and conditions of use. We will only answer
    pertinent points at this stage.
    The signs at the car park make it clear that the land is private property and that a Charge of 100 will be levied if
    vehicles park outside of the Terms and Conditions displayed. Signs state that all vehicles must park wholly within the
    markings of a designated parking bay. The above detailed vehicle was not correctly parked within the bay markings
    therefore you became liable for the Charge advertised.
    We maintain that the signs on this site meet the requirements set by the International Parking Community (IPC) Code
    of Practice . The signs are large, prominent and legible ,so that any reasonable user of the car park would be aware
    of their existence and nature, and would have a fair opportunity to read them if he or she wished to do so. It can
    never be a defence to a claim in contract law to say, "I did not read the terms", so long as the existence of those
    terms is reasonably advertised.
    We note your comments in relation to the amount of the Charge Notice; our charges are neither extravagant nor
    unconscionable and as such, are commercially justified and legitimately enforceable. This was supported by the
    Supreme Court's decision in the case of ParkingEye v Beavis ([2015].
    We are contracted by the landowner to manage and enforce parking on their private land on their behalf. This site
    has been audited by the International Parking Community (IPC) and a copy of our authority has been provided to
    them as part of that audit process. However, whilst we maintain that we do, in fact, have the authority of the
    landowner to operate upon this site (being the principal in
    the contract); the existence of this document has no legal bearing on the contract formed with the motorist. (See
    Vehicle Control Services v HMRC [2013] EWCA Civ 186, para 22 per Lewison LJ).
    Whilst you have made a request under the principle 6 of the Data Protection Act 1998, unfortunately this does not
    mean that you can simply demand us to cease processing your information and you fail to explain or meet the
    requirements for a " section 10 Notice" within your letter as detailed below.
    We are registered with the ICO for the processing of data which relates to the enforcement and recovery of parking
    charges and in respect to you this related to the matter of a Charge Notice (CN), Ref VCS1968700 which was
    issued to a vehicle registration .......on the date in question.
    In the first instance you may find it helpful to review the information on the Information Commissioners Office website. Your request in principle can only be dealt with if the processing of information "causes
    unwarranted and substantial damage or distress" and you must outline this in your request which you have failed to
    do
    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 .......


    any further advice? Thanks for any help.
    Is there any way of determining whether this is in fact station land - it is Northfield station park and ride - centro.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 9th Apr 18, 6:48 PM
    • 62,736 Posts
    • 75,677 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #6
    • 9th Apr 18, 6:48 PM
    • #6
    • 9th Apr 18, 6:48 PM
    It is important that we make you aware that in this case we may pursue you as the registered keeper of the vehicle for the outstanding Charge, as per Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA). The notice sent to you clearly states:

    Please be warned: that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day
    after the Issue Date of this Notice, the amount of the unpaid Parking Charge specified in this Notice has not been paid in full and we do not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, we will have the right to recover from the registered keeper, any unpaid balance of the Parking Charge.
    Report them to the DVLA and the IPC for stating that the POFA applies to railway land.

    Northfield station park and ride - centro.
    I would say yes, that is land under byelaws; read MadHatter752's long but WINNING IN COURT thread:

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5567539

    Same place? He beat VCS and there is lots of useful advice and example letters there!
    • Redx
    • By Redx 9th Apr 18, 6:48 PM
    • 19,697 Posts
    • 24,978 Thanks
    Redx
    • #7
    • 9th Apr 18, 6:48 PM
    • #7
    • 9th Apr 18, 6:48 PM
    you should have expected a rejection, it was 100% guaranteed , so as stated previously and in the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread you are now in IGNORE mode

    you can always ask the TOC for that station if it is land leased by them

    you can also wait and see if this ever gets fleshed out in any court claim where the POC can be demanded and other relevant info , especially when the new DPA comes in next month (or afterwards)

    if it is railway land and subject to bylaws, the bylaw breach should have been in the NTK and subsequent rejection

    also get pictures of the signage at this station and a map and show where any signs are

    you need to research this topic by reading other railway threads like METROLINK here in m/cr and also INDIGO threads and APCOA threads too, so you get the gist

    if it is private land then VCS have 6 years to try a court claim (MCOL)

    come back if you get any legal papers like an LBC or an MCOL, or if the TOC tried a penalty charge through the magistrates court within 6 months (you would be the first one ever if the latter happened- so a guinea pig - hint - this step never happens)

    and as above, report them for misrepresentation

    edit

    that link above , in the court report it shows that there are 2 car parks, one subject to bylaws and one not , so worth checking which one the vehicle was parked in
    Last edited by Redx; 09-04-2018 at 6:55 PM.
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
    • IamEmanresu
    • By IamEmanresu 9th Apr 18, 7:19 PM
    • 3,664 Posts
    • 6,000 Thanks
    IamEmanresu
    • #8
    • 9th Apr 18, 7:19 PM
    • #8
    • 9th Apr 18, 7:19 PM
    Report them to the DVLA and the IPC for stating that the POFA applies to railway land.
    This is CENTRO where they have been able to convince a judge that it is not Rail land? Check the parking spaces are actually on Network Rail land. Some are and some are not.

    Use Land Registry.

    If Network Rail do confirm the spaces then come back. Don't bother about the IPC/DVLA as it is a waste of time.
    Last edited by IamEmanresu; 09-04-2018 at 7:21 PM.
    If you want to win - avoid losing first. Here are a few examples
    1. Failing to Acknowledge or Defend https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5760415
    2. Template defences that say nothing https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5818671&page=5#86
    3. Forgetting about the Witness Statement
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 9th Apr 18, 7:30 PM
    • 62,736 Posts
    • 75,677 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #9
    • 9th Apr 18, 7:30 PM
    • #9
    • 9th Apr 18, 7:30 PM
    It's odd that a person on pepipoo lost a Centro case, yet MadHatter752 won his case.
    • IamEmanresu
    • By IamEmanresu 9th Apr 18, 8:48 PM
    • 3,664 Posts
    • 6,000 Thanks
    IamEmanresu
    It's odd that a person on pepipoo lost a Centro case, yet MadHatter752 won his case.
    Not really. Two different sites. One BW, one VCS in the chair.

    Check the parking spaces are actually on Network Rail land. Some are and some are not
    If you want to win - avoid losing first. Here are a few examples
    1. Failing to Acknowledge or Defend https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5760415
    2. Template defences that say nothing https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5818671&page=5#86
    3. Forgetting about the Witness Statement
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

2,321Posts Today

8,807Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @Pownerpuff: @MartinSLewis thanks to your guidance, my monthly outgoings (bills) are £400 cheaper PER MONTH than they were 2 years ago!!?

  • The programme is primarily aimed at parents not kids. But I think mid teens upwards is likely fine https://t.co/SIJczfKJW8

  • Even if u don't have kids, Id love u to watch my 10 things ur kids need to know doco tonight ITV 9pm. It mixes mone? https://t.co/YIqNbllX8h

  • Follow Martin