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
    • claire07
    • By claire07 31st Jul 18, 11:14 AM
    • 558Posts
    • 175Thanks
    claire07
    PCN for showing expired Blue Badge in error
    • #1
    • 31st Jul 18, 11:14 AM
    PCN for showing expired Blue Badge in error 31st Jul 18 at 11:14 AM


    I have read the Newbies Sticky and copied the blue template. The car was parked at a Park & Ride site displaying an expired Blue Badge in error. The replacement current badge had come during a 6 week period while the car was replaced which may have caused the confusion. A PCN Notice to Keeper from VCS has been received with the usual information about paying within a certain time.


    I would like to appeal and I would appreciate any suggestions as the template doesn!!!8217;t totally fit in this case. I see from other posts that the Blue Badge scheme is not valid on private land so would you suggest I add this to my appeal together with a scan of the current Blue Badge or just send the letter as recommended.


    The signage at the site says Vehicles in Disabled Bays must have valid disabled Blue Badge displayed and the signs on the Disabled Bays say Parking for Disabled only.


    Last edited by claire07; 31-07-2018 at 11:15 AM. Reason: spaces between paragraphs
Page 3
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 11th May 19, 10:35 AM
    • 13,041 Posts
    • 13,364 Thanks
    The Deep
    Regrettably, the result will depend upon the court and that means the judge of the day.

    Claire the mistake these firms make is taking judges for fools. A few may be, but the half a dozen or so I have met certainly are not.

    Most are aware of the scamming nature of these companies and I am sure that, in most cases, their sympathy is with the defendant. Have you complained to your MP?

    Parliament is well aware of the MO of these private parking companies, and on 15th March 2019 a Bill was enacted to curb the excesses of these shysters. Codes of Practice are being drawn up, an independent appeals service will be set up, and access to the DVLA's date base more rigorously policed, and persistent offenders denied access. Hopefully life will become impossible for the worst of these scammers.

    Until this is done you should still complain to your MP, citing the new legislation.

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/enacted

    Just as the clampers were finally closed down, so hopefully will many of these Private Parking Companies.
    Last edited by The Deep; 11-05-2019 at 10:38 AM.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • Snakes Belly
    • By Snakes Belly 11th May 19, 11:48 AM
    • 571 Posts
    • 748 Thanks
    Snakes Belly
    Have you written to your MP? I did but quite far down the line. She did offer to help me but I don't really know what she could have done as my court case was very imminent. Your MP may be able to intervene in your case.

    I don't see how the Beavis case applies in your case as there is no commercial justification for the 100.00 claim. My understanding that this car park is free to rail users with no time restrictions. You have a rail ticket. Then there is the question of the 60.00 that they have added to the claim.

    Have a good look at the signage and how clear it is. Were you aware from the signage that by accidentally using the out of date badge that you were entering into a contract where you would be liable for 100.00 charge? I doubt it.

    There is also the doctrine of de-minimis. This is a free car park to rail users (which you are). You have a valid disabled badge, how have you disadvantaged anyone other than to create a small amount of administration for a PPC? This does not justify a court claim of 160.00 +.I am not an expert but I would include de-minimis.

    These are just a couple of points and not comprehensive and I am sure that there are more.
    Last edited by Snakes Belly; 11-05-2019 at 4:21 PM.

    Nolite te bast--des carborundorum.
    • Snakes Belly
    • By Snakes Belly 11th May 19, 12:22 PM
    • 571 Posts
    • 748 Thanks
    Snakes Belly
    Excel v Miss Bradsell C1DP6Q75 Oldham. 27/2/17

    This was a case won on the doctrine of De Minimis. Not quite the same scenario but same principle.

    The concept behind De Minimis is that "the law does not concern itself with trifles." So if the letter of a contract is broken, but the spirit is not and no harm has been done, then no damages for breach contract apply.
    Taken from the Prankster's blog.
    Last edited by Snakes Belly; 11-05-2019 at 12:29 PM.

    Nolite te bast--des carborundorum.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 11th May 19, 12:31 PM
    • 72,085 Posts
    • 84,433 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I have now received a Claim Form from Northampton County Court with an Issue Date of 7 May signed by Simon Renshaw-Smith as the claimant. It seems I have until Tuesday 28th May to complete the acknowledgment of service form via MCL and until Monday 10th June to file my defence.
    Do the POC on the left say POC to follow within 14 days?

    If so then it's like I hope you will have seen in the other VCS case I've replied on today (other VCS claim threads are your bible for info, plus the NEWBIES thread post #2).

    We read all posts. You only need to read VCS & Excel ones for your research, much easier!

    Have you done the AOS?
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT UNLESS IN SCOTLAND OR NI
    TWO Clicks needed Look up, top of the page:
    Main site>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 11th May 19, 1:50 PM
    • 14,738 Posts
    • 16,934 Thanks
    KeithP
    I have now received a Claim Form from Northampton County Court with an Issue Date of 7 May signed by Simon Renshaw-Smith as the claimant. It seems I have until Tuesday 28th May to complete the acknowledgment of service form via MCL and until Monday 10th June to file my defence.
    Originally posted by claire07
    Your target dates are right, but there might be something useful here...

    With a Claim Issue Date of 7th May, you have until Tuesday 28th May to do the Acknowledgement of Service, but there is nothing to be gained by delaying it. To do the AoS, follow the guidance offered in a Dropbox file linked from post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread. About ten minutes work - no thinking required.

    Having done the AoS, you have until 4pm on Monday 10th June 2019 to file your Defence.

    That's a whole month away. Loads of time to produce a perfect Defence, but don't leave it to the last minute.


    When you are happy with the content, your Defence should be filed via email as suggested here:
    1. Print your Defence.
    2. Sign it and date it.
    3. Scan the signed document back in and save it as a pdf.
    4. Send that pdf as an email attachment to CCBCAQ@Justice.gov.uk
    5. Just put the claim number and the word Defence in the email title, and in the body of the email something like 'Please find my Defence attached'.
    6. Log into MCOL after a few days to see if the Claim is marked "defence received". If not chase the CCBC until it is.
    7. Do not be surprised to receive an early copy of the Claimant's Directions Questionnaire, they are just trying to keep you under pressure.
    8. Wait for your DQ from the CCBC, or download one from the internet, and then re-read post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread to find out exactly what to do with it.
    .
    • claire07
    • By claire07 12th May 19, 2:35 AM
    • 558 Posts
    • 175 Thanks
    claire07
    Many thanks for all the suggestions and I will try to answer the questions. It has been a chaotic weekend so I will do the AOS and SAR reminder on Monday when I can have some quiet time to do it properly and not make a mistake.

    I realise the train company may feel it is the equivalent of not buying a rail ticket but the penalty for that would have been 20 not 185 which is quite a difference.

    I have contacted the local MP.

    The doctrine of de-minimis is interesting and I will look into that plus the bay I parked in just said disabled parking only and the signage could be considered confusing.

    The POC do not say anything about details following in 14 days - they just state the Defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability.
    • Snakes Belly
    • By Snakes Belly 12th May 19, 5:08 AM
    • 571 Posts
    • 748 Thanks
    Snakes Belly
    I can understand the initial ticketing because people do abuse the blue badge system. Upon appeal with evidence of your current badge VCS should have cancelled the charge.

    The de minimis is worth a mention because how have you disadvantaged anyone? It's a free car park for rail users. You have not taken a disabled space as an able bodied person.

    You will need to differentiate your case from the Beavis case which was also a free car park. The car park in the Beavis case was free for a certain period (short stay), This was to enable a regular turnover of shoppers to the retail park. In your case the car park was for the benefit of commuters using rail (long stay) . In Beavis retailers and restaurants could have been disadvantaged if visitors had overstayed or gone off site. In your case no one has been disadvantaged. .

    VCS will state that you entered into a contract which was formed by the signage upon entry to the car park and that you have breached the contract by not displaying a valid BB. To support their case they will cite certain cases that relate to signage and contract.

    VCS may cite Thornton v Shoe Lane and Vine v Waltham Forest in their Witness Statement. Both these cases relate to signage as does the Beavis case.

    In Shoe Lane the car park is a barrier car park where the terms and conditions are stated at the point of entry. A car would stop at the barrier. Not all car parks are like this.

    The signage in the Beavis case was very clear. VCS's signage is often in very small font and contains a huge amount of detail.

    The signage in the Vine case was obscured.
    Last edited by Snakes Belly; 12-05-2019 at 5:11 AM.

    Nolite te bast--des carborundorum.
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 12th May 19, 7:49 AM
    • 13,041 Posts
    • 13,364 Thanks
    The Deep
    The signage in the Beavis case was very clear. VCS's signage is often in very small font and contains a huge amount of detail.

    As is PE's, read this

    https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5972164
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • claire07
    • By claire07 16th May 19, 4:34 AM
    • 558 Posts
    • 175 Thanks
    claire07
    I have received a response to my SAR to Vehicle Control Services
    and they have included the photograph of the sign saying Disabled Parking Only and my current Blue Badge.


    I am probably over-thinking this but as the email sending the paperwork came from Excel (and ended up in my spam!) despite my request being to VCS and all the signs and physical paperwork naming VCS why would they do this and is it something I should query?
    • Snakes Belly
    • By Snakes Belly 16th May 19, 5:58 AM
    • 571 Posts
    • 748 Thanks
    Snakes Belly
    In your rebuttal letter in response to their LBC have you asked for evidence of landowner authority? Ask for it again in your defence. If the signs are VCS and the contract is with Excel then they should not be able to sue you as VCS will not have landowner authority.

    You should keep asking for this but they probably will not provide until their WS. By not providing this information they are not complying with the Protocol and are therefore not helping to narrow the issues.

    They have been known to try to sue in one name when the contract was in another. From memory the Albert Street, Birmingham Car Park was an example of signs in one name and claim in another. There have been a number of cases about this car park.

    If they fail to provide landowner authority a judge could throw out the case.

    From memory Claxtome fought a fluttering ticket case on De Minimis. Claxtome fought three cases and they are worth a read.
    Last edited by Snakes Belly; 16-05-2019 at 6:41 AM.

    Nolite te bast--des carborundorum.
    • Snakes Belly
    • By Snakes Belly 16th May 19, 6:42 AM
    • 571 Posts
    • 748 Thanks
    Snakes Belly
    It is classed as unreasonable behaviour to not comply with the Protocol. If a Claimant takes a case to court knowing that they have not got authority from the landowner that is unreasonable behaviour and could impact on the costs paid to the defendant.
    Last edited by Snakes Belly; 16-05-2019 at 6:55 AM.

    Nolite te bast--des carborundorum.
    • Fruitcake
    • By Fruitcake 16th May 19, 7:42 AM
    • 39,571 Posts
    • 88,271 Thanks
    Fruitcake
    It is classed as unreasonable behaviour to not comply with the Protocol. If a Claimant takes a case to court knowing that they have not got authority from the landowner that is unreasonable behaviour and could impact on the costs paid to the defendant.
    Originally posted by Snakes Belly

    It is also fraud in my opinion. It is in effect demanding money with menaces.
    I married my cousin. I had to...
    I don't have a sister.

    All my screwdrivers are cordless.
    "You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks
    • Snakes Belly
    • By Snakes Belly 16th May 19, 8:34 AM
    • 571 Posts
    • 748 Thanks
    Snakes Belly
    I took a look at the VCS website and noticed this. If the car park in question is subject to railway byelaws then does this put a different slant on the matter?

    Any vehicle which is found to be parked in contravention of the car park terms and conditions will be issued with a Parking Charge Notice in accordance with the advertised parking policy and may be subject to further action pursuant to Railway Byelaw 14 made under S.219 of the Transport Act 2000 (which shall include any amendment or re-enactment thereof).

    Nolite te bast--des carborundorum.
    • Snakes Belly
    • By Snakes Belly 16th May 19, 9:21 AM
    • 571 Posts
    • 748 Thanks
    Snakes Belly
    Excel and VCS are separate entities but owned by the same person/persons. In 2014 Excel was BPA (POPLA) and VCS was IPC (IAS). IAS appeal system is more favourable to the PPC than POPLA.

    Parking Prankster describes this as the Excel/VCS switcheroo in his blog.

    As the contract with the West Midlands Transport Network was taken out circa 2014 it's possible that the contract was with Excel but the signs are saying VCS. It would not be the first time that they have done this.
    Last edited by Snakes Belly; 16-05-2019 at 10:35 AM.

    Nolite te bast--des carborundorum.
    • Snakes Belly
    • By Snakes Belly 16th May 19, 10:31 AM
    • 571 Posts
    • 748 Thanks
    Snakes Belly
    www.whatdotheyknow.com I think that you can email an address from this link and ask whether the car park in question is subject to railway byelaws. They may be trying to morph a penalty under railway byelaws into a contract. This company think that they are above the law.
    Last edited by Snakes Belly; 16-05-2019 at 11:11 AM.

    Nolite te bast--des carborundorum.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 16th May 19, 2:28 PM
    • 72,085 Posts
    • 84,433 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I have received a response to my SAR to Vehicle Control Services
    and they have included the photograph of the sign saying Disabled Parking Only and my current Blue Badge.

    I am probably over-thinking this but as the email sending the paperwork came from Excel (and ended up in my spam!) despite my request being to VCS and all the signs and physical paperwork naming VCS why would they do this and is it something I should query?
    Originally posted by claire07
    Reply to the email and ask:

    Who are Excel Parking Services and why are you replying to a SAR sent to another company, and why does the SAR omit this detail and reason as to why VCS shared my personal data with you?

    I intend to report this breach to the ICO so kindly explain, and ask VCS to explain as well. You are not the same company, I have checked on the Companies House website, so you can't just pass data around a shared office.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 16-05-2019 at 2:31 PM.
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT UNLESS IN SCOTLAND OR NI
    TWO Clicks needed Look up, top of the page:
    Main site>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
    • claire07
    • By claire07 17th May 19, 6:34 AM
    • 558 Posts
    • 175 Thanks
    claire07
    Many thanks Snakes Belly and Coupon-Mad. I will send the email to Excel as suggested and pursue the landowner authority.


    I initially thought the station car park would be subject to byelaws as they are mentioned on the main sign but then the Park & Ride section is attached.


    The train company have not responded to any of my complaints and I don't think I've read too many posts where people have had a train company cancel whereas other landowners seem to have been willing to do this.
    • Snakes Belly
    • By Snakes Belly 17th May 19, 7:37 AM
    • 571 Posts
    • 748 Thanks
    Snakes Belly
    There is another case that relates to the train company and the poster sent for a FOI from the link in my post above. It would be useful to clarify if the land was subject to railway byelaws. Do VCS manage both the main station car park and the park and ride?

    Nolite te bast--des carborundorum.
    • claire07
    • By claire07 17th May 19, 8:01 AM
    • 558 Posts
    • 175 Thanks
    claire07
    I've been reading those posts and that was for Sandwell Park and Ride.


    Northfield has a main Network West Midlands sign saying users are to comply with the Railway Byelaws 2005 but then immediately there are Park & Ride signs with VCS T&Cs (no mention of Excel).
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 17th May 19, 12:10 PM
    • 72,085 Posts
    • 84,433 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Did you read this one as well?

    https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?p=75797223#post75797223

    People can use/adapt that defence or work it into a Skeleton Argument.
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT UNLESS IN SCOTLAND OR NI
    TWO Clicks needed Look up, top of the page:
    Main site>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
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

3,952Posts Today

4,876Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • This is a very useful and interesting, factual piece about what the PM's new Brexit proposals mean and how new they? https://t.co/qM1bCz6FZp

  • After two cancellations, I'm on the 3rd train back from Manch. Just heard its being rerouted as someone's taken tak? https://t.co/sRO4cvoWIw

  • RT @helen_undy: It's hard campaigning at the moment. Trying to cut through amid Brexit votes, protests & political resignations can feel fu?

  • Follow Martin