It might be worth sending a SAR to PE to annoy them and make them do some work.

If you get the other five invoices it's extra evidence that your wife had every right to be there (which is why they cancelled them) and that they are money-grabbing incompetents (they should never have issued the PCNs in the first place).

As lookinforinfo says, you could also see about POFA re this sixth invoice.

Thread tidied.

Regarding the WS, well Ambreen is at least not as repetitive as Wali, so small mercies and all that.

There isn't much substance to it - it boils down to "We put a load of signs up mate".

Point 8: "No stopping" is a prohibition, not a contract.

Point 22: the IPC, the all-powerful arbiters & creators of the multiverse, have said we're right so we must be right.

Use the two WSs I posted links to as the basis for pulling VCS to pieces.  In the part about the Unicorn Food Tax add that Simon has also added £50 legal costs yet is representing himself (include as evidence the April letter you uploaded in post 72).

It's written that the hearing will be "by video conference (CVP)" so presumably you'll be OK.

However, I'm not 100% sure with all these COVID changes being new.  Probably best to give the court a ring to be sure.

Will your snail mail still get picked up between mid-August and the court date of 29 September?

Great work lookinforinfo.  So the OP now has a mound of evidence that the car park owner and OPS are running a scam (and am sure could easily get more proof).

If the OP ever does get a Letter Before Claim it would be fun to send OPS a snotty letter and Solomon Anthony Ramsey-Williams a letter that he would be added as a third party to any court action.  I reckon that would knock the smile off his smug, scamming face and get the ticket cancelled pronto. 

However, the good news, the PCN has been sent out far too late to establish keeper liability (and I presume the same will be true of the one your parents got).

..

So, Simon writes to you and says he's representing himself, but then sticks in £50 legal costs.  That's to be chopped off the claim for a start.

This poor company that just scrapes by and is forced to add on £60 Unicorn Food Tax because they know lots about parking but nothing about legal matters not only have a Litigation Department (letter reference and e-mail address too) but employ two paralegals!  Not only is there Wali, but Asheed too! 

Is the September court date likely to cause you problems given your relocation?

OK, so you need to prepare your WS.  There is a cracking VCS No Stopping WS in posts 83-84 at  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/419312-vcs-pcn-claimform-no-stopping-in-restricted-zone-bristol-airport-claim-dismissed/page/4/#comments

Also read here  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/419686-vcs-anpr-pcn-paploc-now-claimform-double-dipping-st-marys-gate-retail-park-s1-4qz/page/3/#comments  from post 71 to the end of the thread.

Keep the questions coming, that's what we're here for

It was forum regular Ericsbrother who came up with the expression the Unicorn Food Tax, quite an accurate way to describe the extra £60 the PPCs add to their claims with no legal justification whatsoever.

Yes, were OPS to take you to court you would be the defendant and so the case would be at your local court (or any court you chose).  Again yes, you would have to attend (although at the moment hearings are remote due to COVID).

I'll have a look at other OPS threads, but also have a search on this forum for "broken machine" and the same on the Parking Prankster's blog, there must be something.

I disagree that the motorists interviewed in the local paper had a better case than you.  OPS made it impossible to pay, and can be shown to have allowed this at best negligent situation to go on for months.

You've asked straight questions, which is fair enough.  If OPS did sue you, it would be for 2 x £100 PCN + 2 x £60 invented Unicorn Food Tax + £50 legal costs (remember these are capped at small claims) + £50 court fee costs + some interest = around £420.  There are three possible outcomes to a court case

   - you win and owe £0.00

   - you lose, the judge doesn't allow the Unicorn Food tax, you owe £300.00

   - you lose, the judge is lazy and allows the Unicorn Food Tax, you owe £420.00.

Yes, fighting would take some work, however over many months, namely

   - build up some evidence against them as in post 14

   - read other OPS threads here so you get the right idea

   - reply to a Letter Before Claim if it comes, we have loads of examples of snotty letters on the forum

   - defend the claim should it be issued, we have a standard generic defence

   - if the case proceeds, prepare a Witness Statement.  This has to be done seriously & properly.  However, again, there are examples compiled by other motorists here which you could use as a basis.

This is all worst case scenario of course, if they knew you'd be big trouble in court they might well give up before a court claim.

I wrote to hang on 24 hours but in reality the links dx posted are excellent.  Please draft a similar defence and put it here, we'll retweak if necessary.

If you have a look at "Q2" in  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/393251-received-a-court-claim-from-a-private-parking-speculative-invoice-how-to-deal-with-it-hereupdated-jun-2021/  you'll see an updated suggested defence ... very similar to the one you've already sussed out yourself!   

1 hour ago, Hideyspidey said:

its getting too stressful and i fear a  payment is just the easy option now.

It makes no sense to give in now.  The amount you would pay now, and the amount you would pay even if you lost in court, is essentially the same.

1 hour ago, Hideyspidey said:

Ive had another ticket too now from another company despite being on a list of allowed contractors for parking somewhere else.

So this time don't throw away the paperwork, start a new thread, and we'll help you fight that one too.

Understood dx.

It looks like Simon has realised the Excel mistake and has simply lied and has quickly knocked up a false NTK "from" VCS.  However, can you please redact & upload this round of letters so we can be sure?

The Site Team are working on defences at the moment, work which is due to be finished tomorrow, so hang on 24 hours and we'll get back to you. 

In any case, as HB says, the defence will be very, very generic.  We want to keep Simon guessing.

Also, in post 40, you set out VCS's PoC in five numbered paragraphs.  Is that what the original is like?  I ask as it would be useful when your defence is filed to attack the PoC paragraph by paragraph.  Usually this isn't possible as Simon just files a cut & paste wall of text.

Lads & lasses,

Wali's WS is already on the thread at post 41.

Well, it's up to you, if you pay the fleecers £120 that you don't owe you'll get rid of them.

The alternative is to put a lot of work in, albeit spread out over many months, and leave them with a bloody nose.

What they are doing is simple thieving, deliberately leaving the machine not in use so they issue their charges.

As dx says, there is zero chance of you getting a CCJ, CCJs are only issued to people who lose in court and then defy the court and still refuse to pay.

I can go into more detail if you want, but the reason the PPCs usually lose in court is because they invariably send along a solicitor who practises near the motorist's court, who doesn't have a clue about the case.  Then the poor solicitor is dealt a rubbish hand by the PPC.  For example, if your case ever got to court I bet OPS wouldn't mention anything about their knackered machine.  Start introducing evidence that the machine is rubbish, and the solicitor wouldn't know how to react.

As for the 5% of cases that go wrong, well we call it the "judge lottery".  Being a judge is just like any other job, there are judges who are professional and open-minded, and there are some who are lazy and biased.  Now & again the latter pop up. 

The article you found, with its picture of the machine not in use (which I missed, well spotted you!) plus the fact you paid everywhere else in Wales, all back up what you stated right from the beginning - you always pay in P&D car parks, but they made it impossible to pay.  Indeed this evidence suggests the company deliberately leave the machine knackered so they can issue their invoices.

So yes, use that evidence in a POPLA appeal if you want - but don't expect much joy.

Personally I would just ignore POPLA and refuse to pay.  The article you found has links to similar articles.  I read the lot last night, as well as the comments sections (which I indeed added to).  There are the names of several motorists who it should be easy to contact through social media, a solicitor, a FB page, a sort of residents association IIRC and the journalists, who are likely to sympathetic, all publish their e-mail address. 

I'd contact the lot.  I'd ask the motorists if they'd be willing to send an e-mail with their name mentioning their experience with the machine which you want to use if necessary in court - some will wet themselves, but presumably some will help.  I'd ask the FB page/solicitor/residents if they have evidence that could help you, especially photos of the broken machine and names of motorists willing to back up your story.  I should think the journalists would stick you on the front page if you wanted! 

Read some OPS threads here so you can see what will happen if you don't pay.

Anyway, the PPCs generally destroy half the Amazon by sending letters which are meant to be threatening, then get third parties to write further letters pretending the amount has increased to £160/£170 to try to frighten you (no basis in law for this increase BTW, it's just bluff).

They then might give up, or they might send you a Letter Before Claim which you reply to ridiculing their case and telling them you have a mound of photographic and written evidence that their machine is always broken, ready to put before a judge.

At this point they may crawl back under their stone, or they could issue a court claim, which you would defend.

They then might discontinue, or they might chance court, where you would take them on.  In my time on this site, when cases have actually got to court, motorists have won about nine and a half times out of ten.  You can see this in our "PPC Successes" thread at the top of the page. 

You should really send a snotty letter to Euro Car Parks too.  That's because in their murky, back-stabbing world, unscrupulous solicitors would love their clients to start court cases they have no hope of winning, just to get some £££ in.  I suggest you write:

"Dear Euro Car Parks,

I write in response to the so-called “Letter Before Claim” you had sent to me by an unemployed law graduate reduced to doing work for Credit Style, in relation to PCN Numbers XXXXXXX and XXXXXXX issued for alleged parking breaches.

I am writing to confirm that I have no intention of paying these absurd and false sums of money for allegedly breaking a fictitious contract with you.  This whole claim is a nonsense, and I am sure any judge would agree.

Should you wish to proceed with this farcical claim, I will be seeking recovery of costs on the basis of unreasonable behaviour, as well as damages for breach of GDPR.

Credit Style/CST Law have been told to get lost too.

Lastly, my current address is above.

I look forward to your deafening silence."

Invest in a second 2nd class stamp and another free Certificate of Posting from the post office over the next few days.

Well done on all the digging you've done.  You now have evidence that the machine is broken, and constantly.  I see there is a FB page, and a lawyer involved, all of whom you could contact for further proof.

So it's up to you.  You can pay the fleecers 2 x £60 that you don't owe, and the matter ends there.

Or you can stick two fingers up to them, refuse to pay, prepare for a long fight, and use the time to build up a case against them.

We would prefer you did the latter, and would help the best we can. 

So to be clear regarding the legal position.  You have lost two court cases.  The reason you lost is that you didn't defend them.

For anyone else reading.  Never ignore a Letter Before Claim/Letter Before Action, as it is a formal notice of intention to commence legal proceedings.  Certainly never ignore a county court claim form, or you will lose the case by default.

So you now have three choices, none of them very palatable.

1.  Pay the fleecers their £868.  If you do go down this road then for goodness sake read the court documentation properly and respect the deadline for payment, otherwise the mess you are in will get worse.  If you can't afford to pay in one go, take BN's advice in post 17.

2.  Ask the court to set aside the judgements.  This would cost you 2 x £255.  Many motorists have done this here, the court form to fill in is very easy and the hearing short & straightforward.  However, everyone else in this position has been granted a set aside because they had a genuine reason for not defending - i.e. they had moved and had never received the papers.  The judge would want to hear from you

   (a) a skeleton of how you intend to defend the claim, easy and we could help you with this, and

   (b) a genuine reason why you didn't defend.  This is the big problem part.  "I couldn't be bothered to read the claim forms properly" wouldn't suffice.

3.  Defy the court and not pay.  This would lead to a CCJ and knacker your credit file for six years.  As there are three of these tickets involved, instead of the usual one, the fleecers might try enforcement too.

Up to you.

As well as all the letters dx mentions, you will have got two claimforms from the court.  On claimfroms it is clearly written that you will lose a case by default if you don't defend.  It would also have taken about five minutes to Google what to do if you get a claimform. 

For any other motorists reading this thread - never, ever ignore a claimform from the court.