Author Topic: VCS No Stopping LJLA CCJ  (Read 69 times)

0 Members and 42 Guests are viewing this topic.

VCS No Stopping LJLA CCJ
« on: »
Received a PCN as keeper in mid 2017. Replied without disclosing driver and referred them to no liability for keeper as POFA did not apply due to byelaws. All I stated was my observation that 'Your PCN shows the vehicle registered to me stopped at a junction with an airport main road for a maximum of 5 seconds before turning right and being shown further down the road 3 seconds later. This was clearly a stop to turn manoeuvre.' I concluded by rejecting their PCN as invalid
VCS responded by stating 'my appeal' was rejected and 'in your appeal you have confirmed to us that on the date in question you stopped your vehicle on the access road which is an area where stopping is not permitted'. They also stated 'byelaws are not currently in use as the last set of byelaws relate to the old airport site and are now regarded as obsolete by the Airport Company'.

I sent a letter back refuting that it was 'an appeal' and that whilst they had tried to infer I was the driver, there was no basis for them to make this inference. I confirmed that I responded to them only as the keeper and that I would not release driver details. A Notice of Intended Court Proceedings was received in November 2017 and that was the last correspondence from them I ever received.

In early 2021 I moved house and did not use a mail redirection service, instead asking the postman to return the small amount of mail expected at the old address to alert people to the change of address wherever possible as I thought I had notified all relevant parties of the new address.

However this week I received a letter at my current address from a debt collection agency stating that VCS had actually obtained a CCJ for C £270 in December 2021 and I could either settle the debt at 45% of the amount by end Jan or they would arrange for bailiffs to recover the debt.

Very unhappy that VCS have sneaked this through by using my old address when i believe it would have been thrown out had I been informed and able to mount a defence. Would welcome any advice/guidance as to the best course of action. Contemplating an application to have the original judgement set aside via an N244 form. All views gratefully received. 
 

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


Re: VCS No Stopping LJLA CCJ
« Reply #1 on: »
So, to be clear

You can pay VCS £121.50 by the end of January, but your CCJ will remain recorded as “satisfied” for six years.

You can pay >£300 for a set-aside via N244, which might succeed, or might not.

Are these your choices?

If so, the first one is cheaper and you’ve been living with a worse CCJ record since 2021 anyway. Changing the record to “satisfied” would be an improvement.
Clearly you might reset everything with a successful set-aside and defence.
« Last Edit: Yesterday at 03:41:42 pm by jfollows »

Re: VCS No Stopping LJLA CCJ
« Reply #2 on: »
Yes they are the 2 choices. Was hoping I might be able to reclaim cost of N244 from VCS somehow. Would really rather VCS didn't profit from their deceit

Re: VCS No Stopping LJLA CCJ
« Reply #3 on: »
My understanding is that you can include an application for costs as part of your set-aside process, which can include the fee for the N244, but it’s up to the courts whether or not to grant this.

My feeling is that you’ll be better off if you grit your teeth and pay this, but this probably depends on how important having a recorded CCJ until next year is to you.

Re: VCS No Stopping LJLA CCJ
« Reply #4 on: »
There seems a disproportionate number of default CCJs issued to parking operators.

Makes you wonder if some of them check Zoopla (or even the electoral register) to see if addresses have changed hands since their previous contact with the defendant.


 

Re: VCS No Stopping LJLA CCJ
« Reply #5 on: »
There seems a disproportionate number of default CCJs issued to parking operators.
94% of all judgements in the civil courts are default judgements (source)

Although the material facts are different in this present case, VCS v Carr demonstrated that VCS make no real effort to actually find the right address, they just use whichever address DVLA originally gave them.