DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 106237--------------------------------------------------
Re: Airport
By: Redspark Date: January 16, 2026, 2:18 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
New letters :(
HTML https://freeimage.hos
t/i/fUJXYbt
HTML https://freeimage.hos
t/i/fUJa7nV
HTML https://freeimage.hos
t/i/fUJa7nV
HTML https://freeimage.hos
t/i/fUJaYMB
HTML https://freeimage.hos
t/i/fUJaYMB
HTML https://freeimage.hos
t/i/fUJalF1
HTML https://freeimage.hos
t/i/fUJalF1
HTML https://freeimage.hos
t/i/fUJaa6P
HTML https://freeimage.hos
t/i/fUJaa6P
HTML https://freeimage.hos
t/i/fUJahnp
HTML https://freeimage.hos
t/i/fUJahnp
HTML https://freeimage.hos
t/i/fUJaWtR
HTML https://freeimage.hos
t/i/fUJaWtR
HTML https://freeimage.hos
t/i/fUJaYMB
HTML https://freeimage.hos
t/i/fUJaYMB
HTML https://freeimage.hos
t/i/fUJaMAJ
HTML https://freeimage.hos
t/i/fUJaMAJ
Help :(
#Post#: 106244--------------------------------------------------
Re: Airport
By: Redspark Date: January 16, 2026, 6:08 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Can someone help me with this please. Earlier in thread a poster
said in the event of this coming someone would help me with it.
It's a bit worrying isn't it I'd really appreciate someone's
help with how to respond. :)
Thanks
Dave
#Post#: 106249--------------------------------------------------
Re: Airport
By: DWMB2 Date: January 17, 2026, 3:19 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Do please be patient, this is a busy forum run for free by
volunteers.
I should be able to take a better look at this on Sunday. In the
meantime, if you search for any other cases involving VCS at
airports (they also operate at Bristol and Liverpool John
Lennon) you may find some similar cases.
Your defence will be relatively brief, a concise
admit/deny/unable to admit or deny to each of their points, with
reasons as to why no money is owed. The main points are likely
to be (1) That no contract was formed (due to no consideration
offered by VCS) (2) That even if the terms were capable of
forming a contract (which is denied) they were impossible to
comply with (a driver must be able to stop for safety reasons
etc.) and (3) VCS do not know who was driving, and cannot
recover the charges from the registered keeper using PoFA, as
the airport is not relevant land.
#Post#: 106262--------------------------------------------------
Re: Airport
By: Redspark Date: January 17, 2026, 6:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you. Please write more on Sunday. I'll do those things for
now..
Dave
#Post#: 106431--------------------------------------------------
Re: Airport
By: DWMB2 Date: January 18, 2026, 2:42 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hopefully you have found some similar threads. Your defence is
yours, but you could make some of your points using wording
along these lines as a framework:
[indent](1) The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled
to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.
(2) It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper
of the vehicle at all material times, but liability is denied.
(3) It is denied that a contract was entered into with the
Claimant by conduct. To form a contract, there must be an offer,
acceptance, and valuable consideration. The signage the Claimant
relies on is entirely prohibitive, containing no legitimate
offer to park on certain terms. Accordingly, it is denied that
any contract was formed between the driver and the Claimant.
(4) Even if a contract was formed (which is denied), it is
submitted that the alleged contractual terms relied on, namely a
blanket prohibition on stopping, including stops borne out of
necessity/safety, are impossible to safely comply with and
therefore cannot give rise to liability due to being unfair
under the Consumer Rights Act (2015).
(5) As the Claimant does not know the identity of the driver of
the vehicle in question, the liability of the defendant must be
considered in his capacity as the registered keeper of the
vehicle. It cannot be assumed that the keeper was also the
driver (VCS Limited v Ian Mark Edward (2023) [H0KF6C9C]).
(6) The land in question is covered by the Leeds Bradford
Airport Byelaws (2022) and as such is not relevant land as
defined in paragraph 3, Schedule 4 of Protection of Freedoms Act
(2012). Accordingly, the Claimant is unable to recover any
charges from the Defendant in his capacity as the registered
keeper, under the provisions of Schedule 4 of Protection of
Freedoms Act (2012).
(7) Whilst liability for the entire claim is denied, the
Defendant further denies liability for the additional costs of
£70, vaguely referred to by the claimant as "contractual costs",
above and beyond the £100 parking charge. The added costs are an
attempt at double recovery of capped legal fees (already listed
in the claim) and are not monies genuinely owed to, or incurred
by, the Claimant.[/indent]
An example of something you may wish to add, is a point between
(3) and (4), briefly outlining what actually happened (e.g. the
vehicle stopped out of necessity).
#Post#: 106463--------------------------------------------------
Re: Airport
By: InterCity125 Date: January 19, 2026, 3:10 am
---------------------------------------------------------
An additional point worth adding is the unfair nature of the
techniques that VCS use to force drivers in to alleged
contracts;
VCS place a sign on the access road which drivers have no choice
but to drive past - driving past this sign is their basis for
claiming 'contract through conduct' - but drivers have no
choice, they have to pass this sign as there is no other
alternative route. This appears to represent a 'pressure sales
technique' as outlined in the DMCC Act (2024).
When I have time, I will look at the DMCC in more detail but
there is definitely mileage in this angle.
#Post#: 106472--------------------------------------------------
Re: Airport
By: Dave65 Date: January 19, 2026, 4:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Be careful in any thing you submit to these people it will be
the "Keeper" that appeals.
#Post#: 106473--------------------------------------------------
Re: Airport
By: DWMB2 Date: January 19, 2026, 4:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
We're beyond the point of appeals Dave, the OP is drafting his
defence having received a Claim Form from the court.
#Post#: 106476--------------------------------------------------
Re: Airport
By: Dave65 Date: January 19, 2026, 4:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Noted,
It will be interesting to see how far this goes.
I`m still looking out for any at Newcastle airport, they seem to
have been silent for a while.
#Post#: 106505--------------------------------------------------
Re: Airport
By: InterCity125 Date: January 19, 2026, 6:48 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Dave65 link=topic=5816.msg106476#msg106476
date=1768819058]
Noted,
It will be interesting to see how far this goes.
I`m still looking out for any at Newcastle airport, they seem to
have been silent for a while.
[/quote]
I don't think Newcastle Airport is VCS controlled?
It will be interesting to see how other operators get on with
the Red Route / no stopping enforcement. In particular, will
they try and follow the VCS 'model' of claiming contract with
drivers as they enter the airport. The VCS approach has been
spectacularly unsuccessful at the court hearing stage with many
cases going against them on the grounds of no legitimate
contract and/or totally unenforceable blanket terms.
I haven't seen any cases yet where consumer legislation has
specifically been used to defeat a parking operator who tries to
enforce a 'no stopping zone' but it is only a matter of time.
VCS's claim of contract (as you enter the airport) is made out
of necessity rather than any legally recognised contracting
process which a consumer would ordinarily encounter. In most
cases I strongly suspect that drivers passing the signage would
have absolutely no idea that a contract was even being offered
in that split second.
In the OP's case, it seems to me that the County Court claim is
a fishing exercise. As DWMB2 has shown, the PoC is defective as
it states that their case is made against the vehicle keeper -
obviously this is not possible at this airport location since
PoFA is not available to the operator - the claimant is hoping
that the driver will be revealed during the court process.
Also worth noting that the DVLA are coming under increasing
pressure to tighten up their 'reasonable cause' definition on
the supply keeper data to parking operators. One of the key
questions being pushed forward is whether 'reasonable cause' can
be used at non-PoFA locations as there can never be any transfer
of liability to the keeper - therefore, why does the parking
operator need the keeper details?
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page