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
    • supertallguy
    • By supertallguy 13th Oct 18, 9:54 PM
    • 10Posts
    • 6Thanks
    supertallguy
    Advice please - Letter Before Claim - Doncaster Airport - stopping in a no stopping zone
    • #1
    • 13th Oct 18, 9:54 PM
    Advice please - Letter Before Claim - Doncaster Airport - stopping in a no stopping zone 13th Oct 18 at 9:54 PM
    Hi, apologies I'm a little confused after doing the reading in the 'newbies' thread.


    I have done the following:


    1. Read the newbie thread and found the 'appeal' template.
    2. Sent the appeal template provided in this forum that requests more information.
    3. Along with the standard reply letter template and a copy of the signage (A4 size) they sent me a link to the video footage of the car and a copy of the 'no stopping' signs along with some grainy photos of the car.
    4. I've then ignored the further PCN letters as the forum suggests i.e. not entering into any further conversation with them - waiting for the LBC.


    I've now received the LBC and have until the 27th Oct to respond.


    Do I use the template from the Newbies thread? Not the one from the 2013 thread as its been mentioned in a post not to use such old information.


    I've read the letter template provided in the thread: Smart parking ,DRP charge, SHOCK


    Though this says they have not sent photos etc - they have in my case.


    My defence/situation:


    I don't live in the area - I had travelled to visit my friend for his birthday and we went to the airport for a helicopter ride (a present from his wife) and we simply took a wrong turn and had to check the directions (poor) that the helicopter company provided on the booking information. That was when the filming took place.

    What do I do next? I know I need to respond to the LBC but looking for some direction/can I use the letter in the above thread albeit tweaked?


    I have contacted the airport (via email) to relevant contacts on their website but (unsurprisingly) not had a response.

    I feel the 'fine' is very harsh (currently £160) for the amount of time I was filmed (less than 1 minute).


    Thanks
    Last edited by supertallguy; 14-10-2018 at 4:39 PM. Reason: poor wording
Page 1
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 13th Oct 18, 10:20 PM
    • 11,272 Posts
    • 11,829 Thanks
    KeithP
    • #2
    • 13th Oct 18, 10:20 PM
    • #2
    • 13th Oct 18, 10:20 PM
    Smart parking ,DRP charge, SHOCK

    Even that LBC response is eighteen months old.

    Can you find a much more recent one - say, less than three months old?

    When the time comes for a Defence, you might want to look at this one:

    .
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 13th Oct 18, 10:25 PM
    • 9,672 Posts
    • 12,732 Thanks
    beamerguy
    • #3
    • 13th Oct 18, 10:25 PM
    • #3
    • 13th Oct 18, 10:25 PM
    You need to reply NOT in the usual way (and not giving away the driver of course!) but just clearly informing VCS he/she will contest jurisdiction and will hold VCS liable for the £100 court fee:

    THE WORDS .... DO NOT CHANGE
    Should you proceed with a typical small claims track robo-claim, in the first instance be advised that I intend to contest jurisdiction.

    Because of the existence of the Airport byelaws, clearly this matter should not be dealt with by the County Court at all. I understand the fee for contesting jurisdiction will be £100 and as such, be advised that I will hold VCS liable for my losses on the indemnity basis - including that £100 set aside fee - should you decide to waste my time with a claim, and/or if you later discontinue.
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • supertallguy
    • By supertallguy 13th Oct 18, 10:36 PM
    • 10 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    supertallguy
    • #4
    • 13th Oct 18, 10:36 PM
    • #4
    • 13th Oct 18, 10:36 PM
    Thanks for the replies.


    I'll redo a search and see what appears.


    Keithp - I have seen that defence and it looks great - well structured - would I just need to tweak it to my circumstances?


    Beamerguy - I cant just send them that papargraph!? I have seen an LBC reply asking for more details - is that the way to go - prior to compiling the defence?


    I understand that I would have to compile a witness statement too?
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 13th Oct 18, 10:42 PM
    • 9,672 Posts
    • 12,732 Thanks
    beamerguy
    • #5
    • 13th Oct 18, 10:42 PM
    • #5
    • 13th Oct 18, 10:42 PM


    Beamerguy - I cant just send them that papargraph!? I have seen an LBC reply asking for more details - is that the way to go - prior to compiling the defence?
    Originally posted by supertallguy
    This comes from UP HIGH and please trust this.

    KeithP will understand
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • supertallguy
    • By supertallguy 13th Oct 18, 10:49 PM
    • 10 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    supertallguy
    • #6
    • 13th Oct 18, 10:49 PM
    • #6
    • 13th Oct 18, 10:49 PM
    Oh, I trust you guys, there is a lot of knowledge in this forum.


    So do I find a suitable LBC letter to amend and add in the paragraph you mentioned above?
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 13th Oct 18, 10:56 PM
    • 9,672 Posts
    • 12,732 Thanks
    beamerguy
    • #7
    • 13th Oct 18, 10:56 PM
    • #7
    • 13th Oct 18, 10:56 PM
    Oh, I trust you guys, there is a lot of knowledge in this forum.


    So do I find a suitable LBC letter to amend and add in the paragraph you mentioned above?
    Originally posted by supertallguy
    You are at the LBC stage and VCS are working on this
    going to county court. Byelaw cases belong in the
    Magistrates Court.

    Does the above make sense now ?
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 13th Oct 18, 10:58 PM
    • 11,272 Posts
    • 11,829 Thanks
    KeithP
    • #8
    • 13th Oct 18, 10:58 PM
    • #8
    • 13th Oct 18, 10:58 PM
    There are some very lengthy LBC responses on here, but in recent weeks the trend had turned towards shorter, more to the point, responses.

    How about this one:

    Not Doncaster Airport, but easily adapted to your circumstances.

    You can even include Beamerguy's robust words if you like.
    .
    • supertallguy
    • By supertallguy 14th Oct 18, 3:48 PM
    • 10 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    supertallguy
    • #9
    • 14th Oct 18, 3:48 PM
    • #9
    • 14th Oct 18, 3:48 PM
    Hi, thanks for the reply and link to an example LBC reply letter - I will be using this as a template and amending with my details/situation.


    And there's me thinking I've bitten more off than I can chew.


    I think with this letter and that example of a defense I could win this - there is no chance i'm paying £160+ for less than a minute checking directions in a place I've never been before - sounds so simple.


    Lets do this!!!
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 14th Oct 18, 4:01 PM
    • 38,002 Posts
    • 22,102 Thanks
    Quentin
    Hi, apologies I'm a little confused after doing the reading in the 'newbies' thread.


    I have done the following:


    1. Ignored the initial PCN letters as per what I read on here...….
    Originally posted by supertallguy
    For the benefit of other Newbies finding your thread, you DID NOT "read on here" to ignore initial PCN letters


    The advice here is NOT to ignore these PCNs, but to appeal initially!!


    Many do get cancelled at this stage, thus saving all the hassle of dealing with a LBC/Court Correspondence


    (Maybe you will consider editing/correcting your OP and removing that misleading and incorrect "advice"!)
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 14th Oct 18, 4:06 PM
    • 38,002 Posts
    • 22,102 Thanks
    Quentin
    You need to reply NOT in the usual way (and not giving away the driver of course!) but just clearly informing VCS he/she will contest jurisdiction and will hold VCS liable for the £100 court fee:

    THE WORDS .... DO NOT CHANGE
    Should you proceed with a typical small claims track robo-claim, in the first instance be advised that I intend to contest jurisdiction.

    Because of the existence of the Airport byelaws, clearly this matter should not be dealt with by the County Court at all. I understand the fee for contesting jurisdiction will be £100 and as such, be advised that I will hold VCS liable for my losses on the indemnity basis - including that £100 set aside fee - should you decide to waste my time with a claim, and/or if you later discontinue.
    Originally posted by beamerguy
    @ Beamer


    Why will the OP be faced with a £100 set aside fee to pay over this???


    You only pay a £100 set aside fee when applying for a set aside by consent, and that would be following receipt of a default CCJ, which the defendant wants to pay but is too late to do so and get the CCJ removed from the records.


    This is not the case in this thread
    • supertallguy
    • By supertallguy 14th Oct 18, 4:34 PM
    • 10 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    supertallguy
    Apologies, I have amended my first post.


    To be clear, you do not ignore the PCN's but appeal using the standard template in the 'Newbies' topic.


    I too am unsure of the £100 fee and the way the £19 hourly costs have been calculated in the suggested LBC reply letter - I may omit these due to not understanding this - at the moment.
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 14th Oct 18, 8:32 PM
    • 9,672 Posts
    • 12,732 Thanks
    beamerguy
    @ Beamer


    Why will the OP be faced with a £100 set aside fee to pay over this???


    You only pay a £100 set aside fee when applying for a set aside by consent, and that would be following receipt of a default CCJ, which the defendant wants to pay but is too late to do so and get the CCJ removed from the records.


    This is not the case in this thread
    Originally posted by Quentin
    This was a weird typo error.
    .... it's £100 fee to contest jurisdiction, not 'set aside'.

    See Webster1's thread from pepipoo

    This line of attack suggested was originally from bargepole
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • supertallguy
    • By supertallguy 15th Oct 18, 11:16 AM
    • 10 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    supertallguy
    Hi,


    Please see a copy of my response to the LBC below - I have omitted any reference to costs (rightly or wrongly I just want this to be settled and not too fussed about the costs - at the moment - I stand to be corrected....)


    I have found the airport byelaws - out of interest and the letter refers to them specifically so I best have a copy.


    I have used the letter that was mentioned in an earlier post but amended to suit my case:


    Reply:


    Litigation & Debt Department
    Vehicle Control Services Limited,
    Unit 2 Europa Court,
    Sheffield Business Park,
    Sheffield, S9 1XE


    Dear Jake,

    I am in receipt of your letter, reference Letter Before Claim dated xxth September 2018 regarding: VCSxxxxxxx..
    I strongly reject your claim and am completely bemused at the idea that any terms and conditions could have been breached as at no point were any accepted or even requested to be accepted.

    A few things I would like to point out:

    • Although your letter is headed LETTER BEFORE CLAIM, it does not conform to the PAP for Debts guide and regulations.

    • Looking at the video evidence sent to me by you or a member of your team in an earlier correspondence, I see my vehicle pulled up for a duration of under one minute with the brake lights turned on, suggesting the driver had good reason to come to a temporary stop. This is fully allowed and permitted in the byelaws:

    " 5(3) Obstruction - except in an emergency, leave or park a Vehicle or cause it to wait for a period in excess of the permitted time in an area where the period of waiting is restricted by Notice."

    • Nor the driver or any passenger leaves or enters the car during this short stop.

    • Further, the original PCN is a parking charge and the Contravention reason: is 46) STOPPING IN A ZONE WHERE STOPPING IS PROHIBITED.
    Therefore, there is no liability accrued to the keeper under POFA, which is strictly limited to parking matters. Furthermore, the land is Not Relevant Land for the purposes of POFA and therefore can NEVER be any liability to the keeper.

    • I've since looked at the signage on the road, of which this claim is based, and as far as I'm concerned, this is not signage I have ever been asked to keep an eye out for whilst driving and I imagine the same would go for the driver of the vehicle. If at any point the need for me to further investigate this matter, I am sure I will find that there are many reasons why these signs are not legitimate.

    • It is stated that this road is private, therefore you/the landowner can claim whatever you/they like. Yet it is quite clearly a public thoroughfare regularly used as access to not only an international airport but also a number of businesses.

    • If the reasoning for this request for payment is because of any potential obstruction caused by the vehicle in this moment, then it must be pointed out that the person taking this video used as evidence is quite clearly causing a similar level of obstruction on the other side of the road.

    This 'charge' is at best opportunist and obscene and must be cancelled. It is a cause of unnecessary stress and a waste of time for everyone involved.
    Any attempt to pursue through the court will result in an application to strike out for a no cause of action against the keeper OR any possible driver.

    Regards,

    Registered Vehicle Keeper




    Do I also send in the 'reply form' or will this letter suffice?


    Finally - do I sign it or just leave as RTK?


    Thanks
    Last edited by supertallguy; 15-10-2018 at 11:19 AM.
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 15th Oct 18, 11:34 AM
    • 20,598 Posts
    • 32,513 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    Dear Jake,
    You are joking aren't you? 'Dear Jake'? FFS this guy is trying to screw you out of a chunk of money and if you don't give it to him, he's threatening to sue you in court. OMG. I wouldn't even put in a 'Dear'. Just 'Sir' will be enough.

    Regards,

    Registered Vehicle Keeper
    ..... it gets worse. 'Regards' to someone looking to do you harm? Would you be equally friendly and pleasant to a mugger who jumped you for your wallet in a back street?

    This is a business letter leading to a potential court appearance. 'Yours faithfully'!

    it does not conform to the PAP for Debts guide and regulations.
    List the points of non-conformity and require VCS to provide the information to which you are entitled under those points.

    Nor the driver or any passenger leaves or enters the car during this short stop.
    Neither the driver nor any passenger leaves or enters the car during this short stop.

    The rest looks ok, but I've not got a legally trained eye for this stuff - others may comment, but with the loss (hopefully temporary) of Coupon-mad from the forum, getting any detailed critiques of the legal end of things is likely to be very sparse.

    Finally - do I sign it or just leave as RTK?
    Sign it with a squiggle (not your real signature).

    Why would you want to withhold your name?
    Please note, we are not a legal, residential or credit advice forum, rather one that helps motorists fight private parking charges, primarily at the 'front-end' of the process.
    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • supertallguy
    • By supertallguy 15th Oct 18, 11:49 AM
    • 10 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    supertallguy
    Comments noted. I’ll have a look at the PAP guide for debts and will post an updated letter.
    • supertallguy
    • By supertallguy 18th Oct 18, 10:52 PM
    • 10 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    supertallguy
    Updated letter below. What do you guys think?

    Litigation & Debt Department
    Vehicle Control Services Limited,
    Unit 2 Europa Court,
    Sheffield Business Park,
    Sheffield, S9 1XE

    Sir,

    I am in receipt of your letter, reference Letter Before Claim dated xx 2018 regarding: VCSxxxxxxx.
    I strongly reject your claim and am completely bemused at the idea that any terms and conditions could have been breached as at no point were any accepted or even requested to be accepted.

    A few things I would like to point out:

    • Although your letter is headed LETTER BEFORE CLAIM, it does not conform to the Pre-Action Protocol for Debts guide and regulations. Exerts detailed below:



    AIMS OF THE PROTOCOL

    2.1 This Protocol’s aims are to –

    (b) enable the parties to resolve the matter without the need to start court proceedings, including agreeing a reasonable repayment plan or considering using an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
    procedure;

    I have not been offered a method of alternative dispute resolution – I have been given a fine and now a letter with the intention of taking the registered keeper to court.

    (c) encourage the parties to act in a reasonable and proportionate manner in all dealings with one another (for example, avoiding running up costs which do not bear a reasonable relationship to the sums in issue);

    The fine is not reasonable or proportionate.

    (d) support the efficient management of proceedings that cannot be avoided.

    No steps taken to settle the matter via alternative dispute resolution.

    5. DISCLOSURE OF DOCUMENTS

    5.1 Early disclosure of documents and relevant information can help to clarify or resolve any issues in dispute. Where any aspect of the debt is disputed (including the amount, interest, charges, time for payment, or the creditor’s compliance with relevant statutes and regulations), the parties should exchange information and disclose documents sufficient to enable them to understand each other’s position.

    Please provide documents to support how the amount owed is calculated.

    6 TAKING STEPS TO SETTLE THE MATTER AND ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

    6.1 If the parties still cannot agree about the existence, enforceability, amount or any other aspect of the debt, they should both take appropriate steps to resolve the dispute without starting court proceedings and, in particular, should consider the use of an appropriate form of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR).

    At no point has an ADR been discussed.

    6.2 ADR may simply take the form of discussion and negotiation, or it may involve some more formal process such as a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service where the dispute concerns a debt regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

    As comment for 6.1.

    • Looking at the video evidence sent to me by a member of your team in an earlier correspondence, I see my vehicle pulled up for a duration of under one minute with the brake lights turned on, suggesting the driver had good reason to come to a temporary stop. This is fully allowed and permitted in the byelaws:

    " 5(3) Obstruction - except in an emergency, leave or park a Vehicle or cause it to wait for a period in excess of the permitted time in an area where the period of waiting is restricted by Notice."

    • Neither the driver nor any passenger leaves or enters the car during this short stop.

    • Further, the original PCN is a parking charge and the Contravention reason: is 46) STOPPING IN A ZONE WHERE STOPPING IS PROHIBITED.
    Therefore, there is no liability accrued to the keeper under POFA, which is strictly limited to parking matters. Furthermore, the land is Not Relevant Land for the purposes of POFA and therefore can NEVER be any liability to the keeper.

    • I've since looked at the signage on the road, of which this claim is based, and as far as I'm concerned, this is not signage I have ever been asked to keep an eye out for whilst driving and I imagine the same would go for the driver of the vehicle. If at any point the need for me to further investigate this matter, I am sure I will find that there are many reasons why these signs are not legitimate.

    • It is stated that this road is private, therefore you/the landowner can claim whatever you/they like. Yet it is quite clearly a public thoroughfare regularly used as access to not only an international airport but also a number of businesses.

    • If the reasoning for this request for payment is because of any potential obstruction caused by the vehicle in this moment, then it must be pointed out that the person taking this video used as evidence is quite clearly causing a similar level of obstruction on the other side of the road.

    This 'charge' is at best opportunist and obscene and must be cancelled. It is a cause of unnecessary stress and a waste of time for everyone involved.
    Any attempt to pursue through the court will result in an application to strike out for a no cause of action against the keeper OR any possible driver.

    Yours Faithfully,
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 19th Oct 18, 9:01 AM
    • 20,598 Posts
    • 32,513 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    Updated letter below. What do you guys think?
    You don't seem to have asked for very much that you might be entitled to under the PaP. The only request, from my skim read, is this:

    Please provide documents to support how the amount owed is calculated.
    If that's all you want, then that's ok, but you must have other things you'd need to understand their purported case against you.

    Also, please remember that this response is more written for the eyes of any potential Judge, to show that you have tried to 'narrow the issues' before it gets to court and the PPC has been 'unreasonable' in not providing them. It's extremely unlikely that your response to the PPC will get this cancelled, but it does show them that you're not someone who is likely to meekly lie down and pay them.

    I'd be careful in the letter that you don't go off on any 'rant' - remember, it could end up under the scrutiny of a Judge.
    Please note, we are not a legal, residential or credit advice forum, rather one that helps motorists fight private parking charges, primarily at the 'front-end' of the process.
    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • supertallguy
    • By supertallguy 19th Oct 18, 10:58 AM
    • 10 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    supertallguy
    Thanks for the reply.

    I’ll have another look at it and amend as I see fit.

    Is there anything I should be asking for specifically? Think I should reference the byelaws in there too?

    It may make it more robust.

    I’m attempting to avoid making it sound like a rant - definitely want a composed/professional response.

    Thanks
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 19th Oct 18, 12:34 PM
    • 4,129 Posts
    • 4,997 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    Well, what documents would help you?
    Landowner contract? Copies of any signs they claim create the contract? Etc.
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

5,200Posts Today

5,757Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • Many saying sexism or ego. My suspicion as someone who works in TV is that this is a format point. I'd think whe? https://t.co/AXfrv5YqKA

  • I do always ponder when watching apprentice why Lord Sugar is "Lord Sugar" but Baroness Bradey is Karen. #bbctheapprentice

  • Lord Sugar just said "she's talking like she's a 50 year old, she knows it inside out?" Genuine question if ther? https://t.co/6cZJ9d2Cni

  • Follow Martin