VCS/ELMS Spy car 2*PCN PAPLOC Now Claimform for 1 of them - 'NO STOPPING' BP Station East Midlands airport

[lookinforinfo]

VCS are not noted for their veracity when it comes to completing a WS so can you post it up when you receive it so that we can rubbish it. 

 

Normally I would suggest that you swap "I" for  "the driver" but as you have appealed I assume you have already revealed that you were the driver. 

 

However I have looked at the "contract" that VCS have with Harvest Energy. It is rubbish.

 

First thing is that as land is involved, it should be a Deed and for the deed to be valid it needs a director from both companies to sign and to be witnessed by two other people .  So for a start, VCS have not signed, there are no witnesses and Ian Woodcock is not shown as a director of Harvest Energy.

 

No valid deed -no contract formed.

 

There was no contract offered to you anyway because No Stopping is prohibitive and there can therefore not be a contract between VCS and the motorists. [ As an aside this is an excellent reason for you to claim back the other money you paid. I would  go for breaching your GDPR too since they know they didn't have a contract].

 

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/44   sub section [2] is what you want to read.

 

This should be the first thing on your WS as that should finish it.

 

I am still trying to work out how a petrol station can survive if motorists aren't allowed to stop there.

. 

[lookinforinfo]

I think a serious point is being missed with regards to the deed or contract.

This is from PoFA  2  [1]  giving a breakdown of the descriptions and the one that is important to your case is waht is a relevant contract

 

"relevant contract” means a contract (including a contract arising only when the vehicle was parked on the relevant land) between the driver and a person who is—

 

(a)the owner or occupier of the land; or 

(b) authorised, under or by virtue of arrangements made by the owner or occupier of the land, to enter into a contract with the driver requiring the payment of parking charges in respect of the parking of the vehicle on the land;

 

I am assuming that a contract does exist where a director from VCS has signed but the fact that two witnesses have not signed the document means the deed has not been "validly executed" according to https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/44

 

-and I would include the URL since not all Judges may be aware of contracts and the necessity of correct signatories being present. It follows on from there that as there is no valid contract there can be no contract between VCS and the motorist. 

So even if "no stopping" could form a contract [which it cannot], it is immaterial. There is no valid contract end of.

 

I would then go on to say that a company  completing as many contracts as VCS must know that there is no contract at EMA and so to issue PCNs is bordering on fraudulent.

 

In addition under their CoP they have signed to say that they comply with all Laws and Regulations relating to parking. It calls into question there ability to receive data from the DVLA. As per Lord Neuberger  Parking Eye V Supreme Court

"And, while the Code of Practice is not a contractual document, it is in practice binding on the operator since its existence and observance is a condition of his ability to obtain details of the registered keeper from the DVLA. In assessing the fairness of a term, it cannot be right to ignore the regulatory framework which determines how and in what circumstances it may be enforced".

 

The Judge should throw out the case there and then. It fails one of the first criteria in PoFA. You should be asking for exemplary damages for putting you through all this knowing that they had no contract and no case. And to stop them carrying on the scam.

 

 

 

[lookinforinfo]

Bolmsgr   

if it was me I would put it first as if the contract is invalid and if the Judge agrees, then you win the case. 

 

Indeed, it may be that VCS would not even turn up in at the Hearing or withdraw which would be the ideal situation. However this is your case and FTMDave has worked hard with you to help on your WS.

 

Whatever you decide to put it I have modified what I said in my previous post so that you can copy it.

 

Definition of "Relevant contract”  from PoFA 2  [1] means a contract (including a contract arising only when the vehicle was parked on the relevant land) between the driver and a person who is—

 

(a)the owner or occupier of the land; or 

(b) authorised, under or by virtue of arrangements made by the owner or occupier of the land, to enter into a contract with the driver requiring the payment of parking charges in respect of the parking of the vehicle on the land.

 

According to https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/44 

 

a contract to be valid requires a director from each company to sign and then two independent witnesses must confirm those signatures. The fact that no witness signatures are present means the deed has not been validly executed. Therefore there can be no contract established between VCS and the motorist. And even if "no stopping" could form a contract [which it cannot], it is immaterial. There is no valid contract end of.

 

Surely VCS a company that signs innumerable contracts must be aware that no contract exists at the East Midlands Airport. Two points arise from that.

 

The first is that by issuing many PCNs at EMA with knowingly not having a valid contract is bordering on fraudulent.

 

Second, VCS in order  to gain access to DVLA data VCS have averred that they have complied in their CoP that they have complied with all the legal necessities, which appears patently untrue.

 

As Lord Neuberger said in the famous Parking Eye v Beavis  at the Supreme Court [2015] UKSC 67-"And, while the Code of Practice is not a contractual document, it is in practice binding on the operator since its existence and observance is a condition of his ability to obtain details of the registered keeper from the DVLA.

 

In assessing the fairness of a term, it cannot be right to ignore the regulatory framework which determines how and in what circumstances it may be enforced". The Noble Lord is correct and should call into question the right of VCS to obtain information from the DVLA.

 

You may have noticed that in the second paragraph of this post the words "relevant land" cropped up which would be a good follow on for bringing up the Bye Laws and streets covered by the Road Traffic Act in case the Judge did not accept the contract argument.

 

Edited June 24, 2021 by lookinforinfo

[lookinforinfo]

I am amazed you lost. Did you mention that EMA are not the land owners? And the Judge was wrong about the agreement not requiring witnesses. If they are not going for witnesses they need two directors from each ompany to sign the agreement. And that would include for a single parking space

https://www.wonder.legal/uk/modele/parking-space-rental-agreement

 

Further proof is from the OPS v Ms W at Lewes Court with DDJ Harvey 24April 2020 case  FOHM9E9Z where the Judge stated that a deed needs to comply with Law of Property Act [miscellaneous provisions ]  1989 section 1 [3]

(3)An instrument is validly executed as a deed by an individual if, and only if—

(a)it is signed—

(i)by him in the presence of a witness who attests the signature; or

(ii)at his direction and in his presence and the presence of two witnesses who each attest the signature; and

(b)it is delivered as a deed