Friday, 2 January 2015

New tactic - VCS use High Court Writ against student who moved house

[Note. The Prankster is not an expert on High Court Writs and bailiffs. Take legal advice if you are in the same situation. If any information is wrong, please contact with corrections at].

This pepipoo thread tells the story of a student who unwisely ignored parking tickets. Although they could have all been cancelled by appealing them the student did not. Eventually the parking company, Vehicle Control Services,  took the student to court. However, as the student had moved they did not know about the court claim and the parking company got a default judgment against them.

The next step is extremely clever. The parking company then traced the student and took out a High Court Writ against them. Normally if you find you have an unknown CCJ against your name, you can apply to the court to get this rescinded and the case reheard. This happens with ParkingEye cases every day of the week.

However, once you have a High Court Writ against you, bailiffs can turn up and seize your goods. You can still apply to get the CCJ overturned, but this will not happen for several months, and the bailiffs may not wait; you may therefore be in the position of having to pay up, and then having to try and claim your money back from the parking company.

If this new tactic from the parking companies is successful, The Prankster expects other companies to follow suit. The Prankster believes this should be outlawed in the Code of Practice. The Parking companies should be required to confirm the address of the motorist before taking court action, not after. The DVLA should provide this information to them if they previously provided incorrect or out of date information; otherwise, the parking company should trace the address if the motorist has never made contact or if there has been a substantial period since the last communication. If the address turns out to be incorrect after a default judgment has been achieved then the parking company should apply for the CCJ to be removed at their cost if they did not take these steps and then restart proceedings.

Happy Parking

The Parking Prankster


  1. I am not an expert in this but have watched many "Here come the sheriffs". All VCS have done is to transfer the successful claim up to the High Court so that it can be enforced by High Court Bailiffs. Standard technique.

    The difference here between this and PE is that PE seem to want the win so that they can show that they can win in court to persuade people that there charges are 'legit' whereas by getting the bailiffs involved VCS are really after the money.

    1. I have seen multiple attachment orders in county courts around the country from ParkingEye, so they too try to enforce their CCJs. But apart from that the comment is correct, anyone with a CCJ over £600 can get a High Court writ which makes enforcement a lot simpler than using county court bailiffs.

  2. The broad thrust of the post is correct; however, getting a set aside is likely to take weeks rather than several months as is suggested, albeit that this may not be of much consolation to a defendant whose car has been clamped or towed by High Court Enforcement Officers in the interim period while waiting for their set aside application to be heard..

  3. I recently net a lovely young chap from Leeds whilst playing snooker in Leeds. He works part time for bwlegal. His job boss to sort through old claims. The older the better.... then issue a court summons in the hope that the person has moved house. Obviously letters are ignored as the person is not there. They get caught default judgement. The debt can then be chased using a tracer program to find the person.
    He informs me no one has paid to set aside the debt and revisit court. They all think it's to late and start a payment plan. No wonder bwlegal are going to court all the time he thinks 65 % are getting done.