DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 110733--------------------------------------------------
Re: VCS CN - Stopping in a prohibited zone - Bristol airport - 3
x CNs in 13 minutes
DIR By: benb76
Date: February 23, 2026, 2:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Many thanks for your time and support with this, this will be
very helpful tomorrow, I will let you know how I get on.
#Post#: 110734--------------------------------------------------
Re: VCS CN - Stopping in a prohibited zone - Bristol airport - 3
x CNs in 13 minutes
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: February 23, 2026, 3:04 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I would print four copies off.
The Judge may allow you to share the document in the hearing so
all parties can see your arguments - the document is no more
than a development of your stated skeleton defence.
If the VCS legal rep kicks off then you can point out that the
Jake Burgess Witness Statement is at odds with the Particulars
of Claim and, as such, you have had to further develop your
defence to accommodate those changes.
I suggest that you also prepare a paragraph of text to say in
the instance that the Judge asks if you were the driver.
Something like;
With respect to the Court, could I ask for some leeway on this
point in order that I can present my defence. My understanding
is that there is no legal requirement for a vehicle keeper to
reveal who was driving and I feel that I can demonstrate this in
the presentation of my defence.
I would also download and print out four copies of VCS v Edward
from the following link;
HTML https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/w0k19zxzlpf9eumu68u7b/VCS-v-EDWARDS-Transcript.pdf?rlkey=5t2gilebrjx7g0d6jmy32lou4&e=2&dl=0
Also, if Jake Burgess doesn't show then be sure to point out to
the Judge that his statement is hearsay evidence - also mention
that you feel that his non-attendance is detrimental to the
defendant's position as there were bound to be questions that
both yourself and the Court wished to ask.
#Post#: 110739--------------------------------------------------
Re: VCS CN - Stopping in a prohibited zone - Bristol airport - 3
x CNs in 13 minutes
DIR By: benb76
Date: February 23, 2026, 3:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you, I will do that.
#Post#: 110743--------------------------------------------------
Re: VCS CN - Stopping in a prohibited zone - Bristol airport - 3
x CNs in 13 minutes
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: February 23, 2026, 4:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Some more general points from me on the day itself:
- Be as prepared as you can be, but don't feel like you need to
"get everything in", or that you need to get everything in in a
particular order. The starting point is that the claimant has to
prove their case. To that end, sometimes, if things are going
your way, you'll find you have to say very little. As an
example, in the Court of Appeal case in VCS v Carr, Carr's legal
representative won without actually having to say anything in
the hearing, beyond confirming some basic details. If the judge
is focusing on a particular issue, and seems to be in your
favour on it, leave them to it.
- "Play the ball, not the man" - this is VCS v benb76, Not Jake
Burgess v benb76 - you've got a number of strong evidential and
factual points on your side. Focus on these, and don't allow any
of your points to be distorted by emotion. Personally, I
wouldn't refer to their conduct as 'outrageous' or
'desperation', as you risk sounding like you're ranting if you
present it wrongly. Instead, focus on the facts, which is what
the judge should be interested in. For example, where VCS claim
that you can be pursued as the driver on the basis that you've
not named anyone else, whilst this might be outrageous, I'd
focus on the facts behind this, which are that previous cases on
this point have found the contrary. This is personal for you,
but for everyone else it's another day at work. If you can
remove the emotion and focus on the facts, your position will be
clearer and your arguments stronger
[li]If you're getting nowhere with an argument, you can move on
- this isn't a single point case, so you've more than one egg in
your basket. I'm not saying you should roll over and admit
defeat on a point, but if it's obvious that the judge disagrees
with one of your positions, don't end up getting into an
argument. Your opponent is VCS, not the judge.
#Post#: 110750--------------------------------------------------
Re: VCS CN - Stopping in a prohibited zone - Bristol airport - 3
x CNs in 13 minutes
DIR By: benb76
Date: February 23, 2026, 5:10 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you, understood and very useful advice.
#Post#: 110762--------------------------------------------------
Re: VCS CN - Stopping in a prohibited zone - Bristol airport - 3
x CNs in 13 minutes
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: February 23, 2026, 7:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Agree with all the above.
Also, don't forget that you can introduce elements of
'humankind' and 'common sense' to your arguments - it doesn't
have to be all legal talk.
It's highly likely that the claimant will focus on their
'balance of probabilities' argument in the early stages as they
have nothing else.
So, for example, you could point out that a keeper nominating a
driver would essentially amount to presenting the claimant with
a pathway to liability when, at the time, no such liability
could be established by the claimant - why would a keeper
provide that information when that information would
'incriminate' either oneself, a family member, a close friend,
or a work colleague etc and result in them getting a £170
charge? What kind of friend would do that?
The only thing I would say in terms of running order;
I would definitely focus on the defective PoC to start with.
They are pursuing you either as driver or as keeper using PoFA.
The claimant's WS is catastrophic to the claim since it
acknowledges that they do not know who the driver was and that
they are no longer using PoFA - in other words, they've just cut
off the only two routes to legal liability.
Don't be surprised if the Judge bins the claim at that point.
Also, your case is part of a block of cases - if you get there
slightly early then you may be first up - sometimes the Court
Clerk will simply ask you, "Are you ready?" or "Are you waiting
for anyone else?" - so arrive early and be keen to get started.
Your defence is very strong and by presenting it you may well
have a knock on effect with other cases. Their legal rep will
know this and may well bail out on your case if he feels that
your evidence might cause greater 'collateral damage'.
#Post#: 110773--------------------------------------------------
Re: VCS CN - Stopping in a prohibited zone - Bristol airport - 3
x CNs in 13 minutes
DIR By: benb76
Date: February 23, 2026, 8:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you, understood and much appreciated.
#Post#: 110774--------------------------------------------------
Re: VCS CN - Stopping in a prohibited zone - Bristol airport - 3
x CNs in 13 minutes
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: February 23, 2026, 8:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: InterCity125 link ---
>
> Also, don't forget that you can introduce elements of
'humankind' and 'common sense' to your arguments - it doesn't
have to be all legal talk.
>
--- End Quote ---
And anecdotally, it often isn't. Often, judges want to get to
the meat and bones of the claim, rather than spending time
picking apart technical minutiae.
--- Quote from: InterCity125 link ---
>
> The only thing I would say in terms of running order;
>
> I would definitely focus on the defective PoC to start with.
>
--- End Quote ---
Likewise - my point around order was more that if the judge
launches straight in and starts picking apart another element of
their case, let 'em.
#Post#: 111023--------------------------------------------------
Re: VCS CN - Stopping in a prohibited zone - Bristol airport - 3
x CNs in 13 minutes
DIR By: benb76
Date: February 24, 2026, 12:29 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Just wanted to post an update to say that I attended the hearing
today and won! Hugely grateful for all the support I have
received on this forum. The two main points that it seemed to
hinge on, unsurprisingly, were them not being able to prove the
identity of the driver and the contract issue.
Thank you for all the guidance, without which I probably
wouldn't have taken it this far. Burgess of course did not
attend but an agent did. The judge said he could not find VCS v
Edward but fortunately I had printed off copies of it, as per
your advice. The judge was very helpful. I don't know if the
judgement is published anywhere but if it is I would be
interested to know where to find it. The judge awarded me £103
costs.
For anyone else reading this in a similar situation, the judge
agreed that I was under no legal obligation to disclose who the
driver was to VCS. He said that there may be a gap in the law
but it was not for this court to act on that.
#Post#: 111024--------------------------------------------------
Re: VCS CN - Stopping in a prohibited zone - Bristol airport - 3
x CNs in 13 minutes
DIR By: jfollows
Date: February 24, 2026, 12:32 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Well done.
Still at
HTML https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/w0k19zxzlpf9eumu68u7b/VCS-v-EDWARDS-Transcript.pdf?rlkey=5t2gilebrjx7g0d6jmy32lou4&e=1&dl=0
No guarantee it will always be there, but I found it through
Google in under a minute.
Also
HTML https://www.scribd.com/document/676990739/VCS-Limited-v-Ian-Mark-Edward
*****************************************************
Page 9 of 10
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page