Win against VCS at Birmingham County Court, but right to appeal granted to claimant

[93c]

I need help because VCS are going to appeal County Court Judgement that was in my favour regarding Bylaws and this could be very significant.

I have this morning successfully defended in person a case brought against me by Vehicle Control Services. Thank you to all the people that have provided advice, answered questions or have posted information on here (and Pepipoo) that I've been able to refer to. I used several arguments including abuse of process for the £60 which the judge denied, but he agreed with my argument regarding a railway car park being subject to bylaws and therefore not relevant land under POFA and so dismissed the case, but because he disagreed with my arguments regarding abuse of process I was unable to claim costs.

What information am I allowed to post here? When I get the judgement, can I redact personal information, scan it and post on here? What information would be useful to anybody else?

Then I come to the problem. The judge granted VCS the right to appeal because he believed the POFA law and government guidance for Bylaws were unclear and needed a decision to be made by a higher judge. He told me I can appear in person for the appeal but advised I might want to seek legal advice. I've already lost several days of work preparing my defence for this case and I'm concerned that my costs are going to rise and if the appeal is won by VCS then I could be subjected to costs being awarded against me but more significantly that I'll have to spend time preparing again for a court case, reading through the 84 pages of the original evidence from VCS and my response plus new arguments that they put forward. The representative for VCS said that the result of this case could be far-reaching because it could prevent parking companies from charging on any railway car park. As this could therefore be a very significant appeal, is there any law firm that I can turn to that would help me without charging or any campaign groups or consumer groups that would want to help back me on this appeal?

Thanks.

[R0b]

First of all, well done on defending the claim.

You might find it difficult to get some legal representation to assist you in this case though I am not aware of any groups as such that would take on a case like this.

In terms of costs, I believe it is £120 to file an appeal and so if somehow VCS were successful, then it would be the initial costs claimed plus the £120 because the small claims costs rules apply to any appeal. Now, that's assuming VCS do indeed appeal simply because a County Court case decision is not binding on another County Court. Presumably that appeal would be heard by a circuit judge who is at a slightly higher level, it doesn't oblige district judges to follow that decision. They may decide not to pursue the appeal because as their representative mentioned, it could have ramifications and if they lose, it will certainly cause them a problem going forward.

Certainly post the judgment when you get it, but I think it might be helpful to see a summary of the reasons you argued as to why the land was not relevant land. Could you also expand on why the judge thought that POFA and byelaws were unclear?

Tagging des8 and ostell

[93c]

Thanks rob that's helpful. That's useful to know about the appeals and what VCS might do and limitation of costs etc.

The judge didn't give specific details as to why he thought the rules were unclear but said something about this being an issue that arises in courts a lot and that he feels that higher courts should give some clear guidance for judges and so that's why he accepted the appeal. The reasons I argued it was not relevant land were quite simple - there were signs around the car park stating there was a Bylaw in place, some of which were on the same lamppost or fence as the VCS signs. VCS tried to argue that it was unknown if the railway car park was part of the Bylaw, but the judge said it was up to the claimant to prove it wasn't when I had provided evidence of the Bylaw signs and one of the claimant's own photos also included a bylaw sign. I provided evidence of the relevant section of POPLA and also the government guidance that clearly states that some railway carparks are subject to bylaws and therefore not relevant land. It was the signs that won it really because the judge agreed that POFA does not apply when there is a bylaw in place.

[des8]

Can't really add anything to what R0b says except I doubt VCS will appeal,
Their rep probably asked for permission as routine.
It is quite clear that station owned car parks are subject to bye laws.
Breach of byelaws is a criminal offence triable in magistrates court, any fines going to government.

Wonder what the judge found unclear in government advice?

[R0b]

Not sure what government guidance is out there around POFA but the proof is in the legislation itself and in the explanatory notes, which clearly says that if the land is controlled by some other statutory scheme then it isn't relevant land for POFA purposes.

If there was an appeal, it ought to be a relatively easy slam dunk unless VCS can pull something out the bag like a miracle. Thing is, byelaws derive from delegated legislation and the general rule is that you cannot sub-delegate powers that were conferred specifically to a particular authority or body (unless the legislation gives the explicit right to delegate). It is assumed that if the legislation has already delegated, no further sub-delegation is allowed. There's loads of case law at House of Lords level around this.

Suggest you wait and see, the right to appeal is usually 21 days from the date of hearing unless a judge allows for more or less time.