Printfriendly

Friday, 10 February 2017

Vehicle Control Services lose. Wrong claimant

Vehicle Control Services v Ms A C6DP7P37. Birmingham County Court. District Judge Williams

Ms A was in court with VCS regarding an alleged parking incident at Albert Street Car Park, Birmingham. Ms A was not the driver and all the signage at Albert Street suggested Excel were the operator, not VCS. Confused? So was Ms A, and the judge as all the photo evidence in BW Legal's witness statement seemed to confirm that Excel were the operator.



Ms A's defence rested on two points;

1. She was not the driver, and PoFA was not complied with there was no keeper liability
2. VCS were not the lawful claimant as the signage was in the name of Excel.

However, as the case got underway, Ms A remembered something she read about rights of audience and casually asked the judge if the BW Legal hired gun, Mr Rep had a right of audience. The judges ears pricked up and there was an audible groan from the direction of Mr Rep muttering “Not again!”. The judge asked what this was about and Mr Rep handed him a letter mumbling something about it being “..accepted in a court up North.”. The judge read the letter and moved right on.

As Ms A had come well prepared for the usual BW Legal shenanigans, both Elliott v Loake and Combined Parking Solutions vs AJH Films were dispensed with as irrelevant as usual, the former being a criminal case and the latter involving employer liability for an employee's actions and also irrelevant, despite Mr Rep’s best efforts to polish this particular object.

With no proof Ms A was the driver, no PoFA compliance and no evidence that VCS were the proper claimant, the judge ruled in Ms A’s favour with no costs awarded.

Ms A was left feeling rather sorry for Mr Rep as he appeared to have been handed a hospital pass by those titans of the legal industry BW Legal, but soldiered on gamely Mr Rep kindly opened the door for Ms A – a gentleman to the end – and left without saying anything.

Prankster Notes

Vehicle Control Services have been well aware of this problem with Albert Street, Birmingham for a number of years. Previously they have always chickened out of proceeding to a full hearing, the last time being Birmingham in January 2017 when they handed in a discontinuance notice at the beginning of the hearing.

As they would have been well aware they had no case for many years, Simon Renshaw-Smith needs to closely examine his morals. The Prankster wonders why he puts motorists through the ordeal of a court case when he is well aware he has no cause of action. Presumably he hopes that both the judge and the motorist will not notice the wording on the signage, and so he he will sneak an unwarranted charge past the court.

As an aside, nothing should be passed to the judge which is not also given to the other party. If this happens to you, ask for a copy.

Happy Parking

The Parking Prankster

3 comments:

  1. Polishing a turd is rarely helpful

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You could always roll it in glitter

      Delete
    2. The Judge chose to shove the claim up Simon Renshaw-Smith's "Gary Glitter" :)

      Delete