DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 49284--------------------------------------------------
Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
DIR By: m_odwong@hotmail.com
Date: December 11, 2024, 2:10 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hey all,
Any suggestions on what I should do at this stage? I've two days
left to lodge an appeal to the IAS.
#Post#: 49290--------------------------------------------------
Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
DIR By: b789
Date: December 11, 2024, 3:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The IAS is a waste of time but if you insist, just repeat the
appeal suggested.
The most likely outcome of this will be a court claim where they
hope you are low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree and will
simply pay up out of ignorance once litigation starts. However,
in reality, they would never let this get in front of a judge as
they’d receive a spanking.
Eventually, as long as you follow the advice here, they would
discontinue.
#Post#: 49345--------------------------------------------------
Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
DIR By: m_odwong@hotmail.com
Date: December 11, 2024, 8:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Sorry not trying to be difficult, but I'd just like to
understand why they would receive a spanking if it got to court,
so I could be a whole lot more comfortable letting it reach to
that stage.
If the defence is incorrect legal entity, then wouldn't they
just be able to point out that the sign states the contract is
indeed with VCS, which is the correct legal entity?
#Post#: 49362--------------------------------------------------
Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
DIR By: b789
Date: December 11, 2024, 9:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If there’s a sign at the car park that shows the creditor to be
Excel, then they have breached the CRA and the CoP. That would
be enough to get it thrown out in court.
However, these scammers rely on your gullibility in believing
that litigation is a bad thing and out of ignorance you would
capitulate and pay them before it ever got to court. Exactly
what they want.
As for IAS, it’s a joke. Try if you want. When they reject,
don’t imagine tht you have no other options but to pay. The only
truly independent dispute resolution service is the smal claims
track of the county court.
#Post#: 50552--------------------------------------------------
Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
DIR By: m_odwong@hotmail.com
Date: December 20, 2024, 4:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I've appealed to the IAS using the template provided earlier,
and I've attached VCS's correspondence. I've until 8th of Jan to
add anything further before it's passed to the adjudicator. Is
there anything else to add or anything worthwhile to highlight
given their response?
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 51090--------------------------------------------------
Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
DIR By: b789
Date: December 27, 2024, 9:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Did you simply send the appeal I suggested as your IAS appeal?
If not, please show us what you sent to the IAS.
You must highlight the points that you raised where they have
not been responded to or the response given is wrong. For
example, point #8 in VCS's response:
--- Quote ---
> 8. Vehicle Control Services Ltd is a wholly owned subsidiary
of Excel Parking Services Ltd and operates as a group company.
Furthermore, the signs clearly advise “By entering and remaining
in this private car park you, the driver, are entering into a
contract with Vehicle Control Services Ltd and you agree to pay
a charge if you fail to comply with the Terms and Conditions”.
--- End Quote ---
You would respond as follows:
--- Quote ---
> The appellant notes with concern the vexatious and misleading
behaviour exhibited by Vehicle Control Services Ltd (VCS), a
company whose reputation within the parking enforcement industry
is well-documented. VCS’s practices often operate on the margins
of legality, and their conduct in this case, particularly in
Point 8 of their rebuttal, exemplifies this. By asserting that
they can enforce a contract under the name of their sister
company, Excel Parking Services Ltd—a completely separate legal
entity with its own registration number at Companies House—VCS
demonstrates a blatant disregard for the principles of contract
law and due process.
>
> This approach constitutes a flagrant abuse of process. VCS’s
argument is not only legally untenable but also indicative of a
broader pattern of vexatious enforcement. It is deeply troubling
that a company should present such an argument, which appears
either to misunderstand or, more likely to deliberately
misrepresent basic legal principles regarding contract formation
and the distinction between separate corporate entities.
>
> The appellant also questions the impartiality and legitimacy
of the Independent Appeals Service (IAS). The IAS’s
well-documented appeal success rate, which reportedly stands at
less than 5%, undermines any claims of "independence". The
anonymity of IAS adjudicators and the lack of transparency
regarding their qualifications or legal training further erode
confidence in this process. This “kangaroo court” system serves
to prioritise the interests of parking operators—its financial
backers—over fair and impartial adjudication.
>
> Despite these systemic flaws, the appellant maintains that
this case is so clear-cut that even the IAS should recognise the
fundamental legal error in VCS’s arguments. Should the IAS fail
to do so, the appellant is prepared to contest this matter in
the County Court, where the integrity of the legal process will
ensure a fair hearing. The appellant is fully aware that IAS
decisions are not binding and will not treat an adverse outcome
as the final resolution of this dispute.
--- End Quote ---
Also, in point 14 of VCS's response where they state:
--- Quote ---
> 14. A copy of our authority to manage parking on this site was
supplied as part of the IPC audit process and is available
solely to the Adjudicator for their perusal. As this is a
commercially sensitive document, and is irrelevant to the issues
at hand, this is not provided as evidence in this appeal, which
may be accessed and circulated by the appellant.
--- End Quote ---
You could respond with the following:
--- Quote ---
> In Point 14 of their response, VCS asserts that their
authority to manage parking on this site has been supplied as
part of the IPC audit process and is available solely to the
adjudicator for review. They claim this document is
"commercially sensitive" and therefore not provided to the
appellant. This stance is a blatant abuse of process and a
direct affront to the principles of transparency and fairness.
>
> The appellant maintains that VCS is not the named operator on
the contract purportedly flowing from the landowner, and their
refusal to evidence this contract is unacceptable. Contract law
requires clarity and proof of authority, particularly when a
party seeks to enforce terms against another. VCS’s claim that
this document is “irrelevant” is not only absurd but also
legally unsustainable. The existence and terms of such a
contract are central to this dispute. Without it, VCS has no
standing to enforce the Parking Charge Notice.
>
> By insisting that the contract is only accessible to the
adjudicator, VCS is effectively asking for blind trust while
denying the appellant a fair opportunity to challenge their
claim. This is not just unfair; it is procedurally improper. Any
adjudicator with even a basic understanding of legal principles
would recognise that this approach would not stand up to
scrutiny in a court of law. Such secrecy would be entirely
unacceptable in a legitimate legal process, where both parties
are entitled to see and challenge all evidence presented.
>
> Should the IAS accept VCS’s argument on this point, it will
only further confirm what many already know: the IAS is not
truly independent but operates as a mechanism to protect the
interests of parking operators. The appellant is fully aware
that the IAS decision is not binding and will not treat it as
the final resolution of this matter. Instead, the appellant
invites VCS to escalate this to the only truly independent
dispute resolution service—the County Court—where a qualified
judge will undoubtedly scrutinise and understand the significant
contractual and legal failings in VCS’s position.
--- End Quote ---
So, now that you understand how to respond, you can refer to any
other posts where VCS have either not responded/rebutted your
points or they are making points that are not based on law or
their CoP.
#Post#: 55159--------------------------------------------------
Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
DIR By: m_odwong@hotmail.com
Date: January 26, 2025, 8:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I've appealed as per the suggestions, and as expected IAS have
dismissed the appeal giving the following justification:
I am satisfied that the Appellant was parked in an area where
the Operator has authority to issue Parking Charge Notices and
to take the necessary steps to enforce them. The Appellant's
contention that VCS has no legal standing is not accepted. The
signage clearly states that VCS will be the creditor in the
event of a PCN being issued.
What's the likely process now? Having read some other posts, it
sounds like VCS will go through a debt recovery firm (which as
per the suggestions on this form should be ignored) and then
presumably it will be taken to court. Is my understanding
correct?
On a separate note, I received a warning for bumping a post.
It's unclear to me what should be done instead when looking for
a reply to an unanswered question.
#Post#: 55165--------------------------------------------------
Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: January 26, 2025, 8:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote ---
> What's the likely process now? Having read some other posts,
it sounds like VCS will go through a debt recovery firm (which
as per the suggestions on this form should be ignored) and then
presumably it will be taken to court. Is my understanding
correct?
--- End Quote ---
That is essentially correct. After the barrage of debt collector
letters, which you should ignore, you'll probably receive a
"letter of claim" from solicitors representing VCS. When you get
this, come back to this thread for help.
--- Quote ---
> On a separate note, I received a warning for bumping a post.
It's unclear to me what should be done instead when looking for
a reply to an unanswered question.
--- End Quote ---
Essentially, we ask that you are patient. This is a busy forum,
and we offer free legal advice as volunteers. Sometimes, replies
may well take a few days. As you can hopefully understand, if
everyone bumped their thread when they hadn't received a
response in 2/3 days, it would be almost impossible for us to
keep up.
#Post#: 55172--------------------------------------------------
Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
DIR By: b789
Date: January 26, 2025, 9:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If you used the wording I provided in your response to VCS's
operator response pack, what more evidence does anyone need to
prove that the IAS is a charade and unfit for purpose.
As above, the IAS decision is not binding on you. Ignore
everything except a Letter of Claim (LoC) od an actual N1SDT
Claim Form from the CNBC.
No one pays a penny to these scammers if they follow the advice.
#Post#: 69322--------------------------------------------------
Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
DIR By: m_odwong@hotmail.com
Date: April 30, 2025, 3:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi all,
I have received a letter of claim sent by HM Courts & Tribunals
Service including a response pack containing two forms - N9A:
Admission Form, and N9B defense form.
Presumably I'll need to fill in the N9B form, is there anything
in particular to be aware of when filling in the form? If not,
I'll just use the same defence as submitted to the IAS.
Thanks
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 6
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page