Free Traffic Legal Advice

Live cases legal advice => Private parking tickets => Topic started by: m_odwong@hotmail.com on November 18, 2024, 10:23:09 pm

Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: b789 on July 23, 2025, 08:09:38 am
You are looking at a copy of the claimants, out of date form. As mentioned above, mediation is now mandatory.

Having received your own N180 (make sure it is not simply a copy of the claimants N180), do not use the paper form. Ignore all the other forms that came with it. you can discard those. Download your own here and fill it in on your computer. You sign it by simply typing your full name in the signature box.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/673341e779e9143625613543/N180_1124.pdf

Here are the answers to some of the less obvious questions:

• The name of the court is "Civil National Business Centre".

• To be completed by "Your full name" and you are the "Defendant".

• C1: "YES"

• D1: "NO". Reason: "I wish to question the Claimant about their evidence at a hearing in person and to expose omissions and any misleading or incorrect evidence or assertions.
Given the Claimant is a firm who complete cut & paste parking case paperwork for a living, having this case heard solely on papers would appear to put the Claimant at an unfair advantage, especially as they would no doubt prefer the Defendant not to have the opportunity to expose the issues in the Claimants template submissions or speak as the only true witness to events in question
.."

• F1: Whichever is your nearest county court. Use this to find it: https://www.find-court-tribunal.service.gov.uk/search-option

• F3: "1".

• Sign the form by simply typing your full name for the signature.

When you have completed the form, attach it to a single email addressed to both dq.cnbc@justice.gov.uk and info@dcblegal.co.uk and CC in yourself. Make sure that the claim number is in the subject field of the email.
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: jfollows on July 22, 2025, 08:26:40 pm
Thanks for the details, I've now received the N180 form. Just a quick question, should I leave the mediation section blank?
No.
Mediation is now mandatory, but you will offer Ł0 to settle and your offer won’t be accepted. It’s a box-ticking exercise for the court system.
Search this forum for many examples and discussion.
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: m_odwong@hotmail.com on July 22, 2025, 07:59:05 pm
Thanks for the details, I've now received the N180 form. Just a quick question, should I leave the mediation section blank?
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: DWMB2 on July 08, 2025, 10:05:09 pm
Great, will do. Many thanks for the quick response!

You are not the OP...?
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: filippi9 on July 08, 2025, 10:02:53 pm
Great, will do. Many thanks for the quick response!
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: b789 on July 08, 2025, 08:51:27 pm
Yes. Here is the advice for your won N180 DQ:

Having received your own N180 (make sure it is not simply a copy of the claimants N180), do not use the paper form. Ignore all the other forms that came with it. you can discard those. Download your own here and fill it in on your computer. You sign it by simply typing your full name in the signature box.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/673341e779e9143625613543/N180_1124.pdf

Here are the answers to some of the less obvious questions:

• The name of the court is "Civil National Business Centre".

• To be completed by "Your full name" and you are the "Defendant".

• C1: "YES"

• D1: "NO". Reason: "I wish to question the Claimant about their evidence at a hearing in person and to expose omissions and any misleading or incorrect evidence or assertions.
Given the Claimant is a firm who complete cut & paste parking case paperwork for a living, having this case heard solely on papers would appear to put the Claimant at an unfair advantage, especially as they would no doubt prefer the Defendant not to have the opportunity to expose the issues in the Claimants template submissions or speak as the only true witness to events in question
.."

• F1: Whichever is your nearest county court. Use this to find it: https://www.find-court-tribunal.service.gov.uk/search-option

• F3: "1".

• Sign the form by simply typing your full name for the signature.

When you have completed the form, attach it to a single email addressed to both dq.cnbc@justice.gov.uk and info@dcblegal.co.uk and CC in yourself. Make sure that the claim number is in the subject field of the email.
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: m_odwong@hotmail.com on July 08, 2025, 08:14:53 pm
Hey all,

I've received an email now from the solicitors stating that the client wishes to proceed with the claim, that the N180 has been filed with the court, but also that their client may be willing to settle the case.

Should I just ignore this correspondence, and wait for the court to issue the N180?

Thanks
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: b789 on May 05, 2025, 02:47:51 pm
The forms that accompany the claim are not necessary. Why would you want to provide detailed personal information that is not necessary for the conduct of the claim?

You don't use the MCOL to submit your defence because it is severely limited in the number of characters you can enter and it is not only not formatted, but it simply puts the defence as a single wall of unreadable text.
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: m_odwong@hotmail.com on May 05, 2025, 01:52:14 pm
Many thanks for the defence and draft order links! I've submitted the defence and will keep you all updated on progress.

Out of interest, why are the forms supplied by HMCTS not the right ones to submit in this instance, and/or not use the online service to respond to the claim (moneyclaim.gov.uk)?

Thanks all for the help so far, much appreciated!
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: b789 on May 01, 2025, 08:52:55 am
With an issue date of 25th April, you have until 4pm on Wednesday 3rd 14th May to submit your defence. If you submit an Acknowledgement of Service (AoS) before then, you would then have until 4pm on Wednesday 28th May to submit your defence.

If you want to submit an AoS then follow the instructions in this linked PDF:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/xvqu3bask5m0zir/money-claim-online-How-to-Acknowledge.pdf?dl=0

Otherwise, here is the defence and link to the draft order that goes with it. You only need to edit your name and the claim number. You sign the defence by typing your full name for the signature and date it. There is nothing to edit in the draft order.

When you're ready you combine both documents as a single PDF attachment and send as an attachment in an email to claimresponses.cnbc@justice.gov.uk and CC in yourself. The claim number must be in the email subject field and in the body of the email just put: "Please find attached the defence and draft order in the matter of Vehicle Control Services Ltd v [your full name] Claim no.: [claim number]."

Quote
IN THE COUNTY COURT
Claim No: [Claim Number]

BETWEEN:

Vehicle Control Services Ltd

Claimant

- and -

[Defendant's Full Name]


Defendant



DEFENCE

1. The Defendant denies the claim in its entirety. The Defendant asserts that there is no liability to the Claimant and that no debt is owed. The claim is without merit and does not adequately disclose any comprehensible cause of action.

2. There is a lack of precise detail in the Particulars of Claim (PoC) in respect of the factual and legal allegations made against the Defendant such that the PoC do not comply with CPR 16.4.

3. The Defendant is unable to plead properly to the PoC because:

(a) The contract referred to is not detailed or attached to the PoC in accordance with CPR PD 16(7.5);

(b) The PoC do not state the exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the terms and conditions of the contract (or contracts) which is/are relied on;

(c) The PoC do not adequately set out the reason (or reasons) why the claimant asserts the defendant has breached the contract (or contracts)

(d) The PoC do not state with sufficient particularity exactly where the breach occurred, the exact time when the breach occurred and how long it is alleged that the vehicle was parked before the parking charge was allegedly incurred;

(e) The PoC do not state precisely how the sum claimed is calculated, including the basis for any statutory interest, damages, or other charges;

(f) The PoC do not state what proportion of the claim is the parking charge and what proportion is damages;

(g) The PoC do not provide clarity on whether the Defendant is sued as the driver or the keeper of the vehicle, as the claimant cannot plead alternative causes of action without specificity.

4. The Defendant attaches to this defence a copy of a draft order approved by a district judge at another court. The court struck out the claim of its own initiative after determining that the Particulars of Claim failed to comply with CPR 16.4. The judge noted that the claimant had failed to:

(i) Set out the exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the terms and conditions relied upon;

(ii) Adequately explain the reasons why the defendant was allegedly in breach of contract;

(iii) Provide separate, detailed Particulars of Claim as permitted under CPR PD 7C.5.2(2).

(iv) The court further observed that, given the modest sum claimed, requiring further case management steps would be disproportionate and contrary to the overriding objective. Accordingly, the judge struck out the claim outright rather than permitting an amendment.

5. The Defendant submits that the same reasoning applies in this case and invites the court to adopt a similar approach by striking out the claim for the Claimant’s failure to comply with CPR 16.4.

Statement of truth

I believe that the facts stated in this Defence are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

Signed:


Date:

Draft Order for the defence (https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/tcewefk7daozuje25chkl/Strikeout-order-v2.pdf?rlkey=wxnymo8mwcma2jj8xihjm7pdx&st=nbtf0cn6&dl=0)
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: m_odwong@hotmail.com on April 30, 2025, 10:14:07 pm
I found the initial LOC, hadn't read it carefully , thought it was just another debt collector letter. The LOC is dated: 21 March 2025.

I don't see any mention of N1SDT though. I may have discarded it if it were sent in a different letter, but I doubt it.

I've linked the claim form from HMCTS and the initial LOC (front and back).

(https://i.imgur.com/bhDIlwB.jpeg)
(https://i.imgur.com/AD7Wd9w.jpeg)
(https://i.imgur.com/7I9ZINU.jpeg)
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: b789 on April 30, 2025, 10:57:15 am
As above... when did you receive the LoC? Why did you not keep us updated? What is the issue date of the claim?

You DO NOT complete any of the forms you have received!!!!!

The first thing you do is answer the question about the LoC and then you SHOW us the N1SDT part of the Claim Form. WE do not need to see anything else that came with the letter from HMCTS!

You only redact your personal data, the claim number and the MCOL password. You leave EVERYTHING else visible, especially all dates and times.
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: DWMB2 on April 30, 2025, 09:37:37 am
Show us what you have received.

You should have received at least a Letter of Claim before this.
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: m_odwong@hotmail.com on April 30, 2025, 09:25:02 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
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: b789 on January 26, 2025, 03:24:51 pm
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.
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: DWMB2 on January 26, 2025, 02:24:47 pm
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?
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.
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.
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: m_odwong@hotmail.com on January 26, 2025, 02:02:02 pm
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.
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: b789 on December 27, 2024, 03:23:32 pm
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”.

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.

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.

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.

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.
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: m_odwong@hotmail.com on December 20, 2024, 10:37:54 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]
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: b789 on December 11, 2024, 03:51:31 pm
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.
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: m_odwong@hotmail.com on December 11, 2024, 02:42:24 pm
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?

 
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: b789 on December 11, 2024, 09:37:53 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.
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: m_odwong@hotmail.com on December 11, 2024, 08:10:47 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.
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: m_odwong@hotmail.com on December 08, 2024, 07:21:34 pm
It's pretty much as per the PCN.

A ticket was bought for two hours, which expired at 14:35. So the tickets would have been bought at 12:35. The cameras have the car entering the car park at 12:32 and exiting at 14:49, which exceeded the duration by 14 minutes, and is the reason for the PCN.

Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: H C Andersen on December 08, 2024, 06:02:55 pm
OP, take us through the process pl.

The driver bought parking rights at what time??

 Drivers have up to 10 minutes to purchase parking rights.

Ł100 parking charge payable if time of parking rights exceeded.

Your first post is misleading in the context of the signs. This is NOT an entry/exit equation as suggested by the NTK, it's a time exited-grace period-time parking rights bought v  parking rights period equation.
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: DWMB2 on December 08, 2024, 05:56:01 pm
That main terms and conditions sign is bizarre. It bears Excel's logo, then says that VCS are the creditor and the entity with whom contracts are formed, but then says that Excel will have the right to take legal action!
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: b789 on December 08, 2024, 05:52:44 pm
It doesn't matter as long as there is at least one sign in the car park that shows Excel. However, by fretting over the "mugs discount" you have messed up the initial appeal. You should not have appealed simply because you are thinking about paying the Mugs Discount. You either want to fight it or you don't.

Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: m_odwong@hotmail.com on December 08, 2024, 05:50:04 pm
Apologies, I had to quickly respond to the PCN as I was reaching the "discount" time limit in which to lodge the appeal.

Thanks for the suggested appeal, but on the sign it does say though that the contract is with VCS. Just so I'm clear are you essentially suggesting that the contract with VCS is void because the car park is managed by Excel?
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: DWMB2 on December 08, 2024, 05:47:35 pm
Quote
Apologies, it wouldn't let me create an account on imgur
You don't need to create an account with Imgur in order to upload pictures there
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: b789 on December 08, 2024, 05:36:44 pm
Some of the signs just show Excel, and others showing both Excel and VCS. The main sign next to the parking meter does say the contract is with VCS.

Also, the initial appeal I made was rejected on the basis there is sufficient signage, making it clear that a Ł100 charge will be levied if parked outside the Terms and Conditions displayed, and that I exited the car park after the ticket expired.

Do I have any basis on which to appeal this?

So you've already appealed this. You didn't say and I've just wasted my time composing one for you. It's too late to do anything except you can try your luck with the kangaroo court that is the IAS. I suspect that the only way this is gong to be resolved is in the county court.

If those are your own photos, make sure you keep the Metadata for them and, if you can, get them date and time stamped. If not, get your own photos of any signs at the car park that have the Excel logo on them.

In the context of private parking enforcement, the entity named on the signage at a parking location is typically considered the contracting party. If the signage displays "Excel Parking Services Ltd." but the Notice to Keeper (NtK) is issued by "Vehicle Control Services Ltd. (VCS)," this discrepancy is significant. Despite both companies being sister entities with common directors, they are separate legal entities with distinct company registration numbers.

A contract is formed between the driver and the entity named on the signage. Therefore, if Excel Parking Services Ltd. is the company identified on the signs, any contractual agreement would be with them, not VCS. This means VCS lack the legal standing to enforce the parking charge, as they are not a party to the contract formed by the signage.

VCS/Excel have lost several claims because of this discrepancy.

If you receive an NtK from a company different from the one named on the signage, you should appeal the charge by highlighting this inconsistency. In your appeal, state that the contract was with the company named on the signage (Excel Parking Services Ltd.), and therefore, VCS has no legal authority to enforce the charge. Make sure you have the photos of the signs to support your appeal.

Here is a suggested appeal:

Quote
Parking Charge Notice Reference: [Insert PCN Number]
Vehicle Registration: [Insert Vehicle Registration]

This is a formal Registered Keeper appeal of the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) referenced above, issued by Vehicle Control Services Ltd. (VCS). I do not believe this charge is valid, and I request its immediate cancellation on the following grounds:

1. Incorrect Legal Entity on Signage
The signage at the location in question clearly identifies the operator as Excel Parking Services Ltd., not Vehicle Control Services Ltd. (VCS). It is well-established that Excel Parking Services Ltd. and Vehicle Control Services Ltd. are separate legal entities with distinct company registration numbers, despite having the same directors.

As a result, the contract entered into at the time of parking was with Excel Parking Services Ltd., the entity named on the signage. VCS, as a separate legal entity, has no standing to enforce any alleged contractual terms or to issue this PCN.

2. Failure to Establish Legal Standing
In order for VCS to pursue this charge, you must demonstrate legal standing to do so. Since Excel Parking Services Ltd. is the company named on the signage and therefore the party to any potential contract, VCS has no contractual or legal authority to act in this matter. I request that you provide evidence of your authority to issue this PCN and to enforce any charges in relation to parking at this location.

3. Request for Evidence
If you believe that VCS is entitled to enforce this charge, please provide the following evidence:

1. A copy of the contract between VCS and the landowner granting you authority to operate and enforce parking at this site.
2. Evidence of your compliance with the BPA/IPC Single Code of Practice (SCoP) in relation to signage and correspondence.
3. A detailed explanation of how VCS has the legal right to pursue charges at a location where Excel Parking Services Ltd. is the named entity.

4. Photographic Evidence
Should VCS not cancel this PCN, I have photographs of the signage at the location, which clearly display the name Excel Parking Services Ltd. and will not hesitate to evidence them in any subsequent litigation should VCS be so inclined to persist in this futile exercise.

Given the above, I suggest the immediate cancellation of this PCN. Additionally, pursuing this charge without demonstrating the legal standing to do so constitutes a breach of consumer protection laws.

If you reject this appeal, please provide a detailed response addressing each of the points raised, along with the necessary evidence to support your position. Failure to do so will result in further action, including a formal complaint to the IPC.

Please consider this a formal request for your response within the timeframe specified by the BPA/IPC Single Code of Practice.
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: m_odwong@hotmail.com on December 08, 2024, 05:15:42 pm
Some of the signs just show Excel, and others showing both Excel and VCS. The main sign next to the parking meter does say the contract is with VCS.

Also, the initial appeal I made was rejected on the basis there is sufficient signage, making it clear that a Ł100 charge will be levied if parked outside the Terms and Conditions displayed, and that I exited the car park after the ticket expired.

Do I have any basis on which to appeal this?

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: b789 on November 19, 2024, 11:55:28 am
You need to check the signs at the car park. The PCN is from VCS. The signs in the GSV, show it is run by Excel. However, the GSV images are over 7 years old.

Please let us know which company is showing on the signs now. Take a photo.
Title: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
Post by: m_odwong@hotmail.com on November 18, 2024, 10:23:09 pm
Hi,

The driver purchased 2 hour parking, but unintentionally exceeded the stay at the car park by 17 minutes.

Is there anything that can be done to cancel the PCN, seems a bit harsh to issue a penalty charge just for exceeding it by 17 min.

Apologies, it wouldn't let me create an account on imgur, so have uploaded the PCN on the site. Here is the link to the street view, which admittedly looks to be rather old, and not entirely sure if that sign next to the machine is still there:

https://www.google.com/maps/@51.4921276,0.0622832,3a,75y,209.59h,87.38t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sxg4D7xEtIVjbuNy9WLOp-A!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D2.6234244695773867%26panoid%3Dxg4D7xEtIVjbuNy9WLOp-A%26yaw%3D209.58785472103938!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI0MTExMy4xIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D
 

Thanks,
Maikol

[attachment deleted by admin]