Pre action protocol -Letter of claim DCB Legal |
Pre action protocol -Letter of claim DCB Legal |
Wed, 22 Feb 2023 - 19:32
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13 Joined: 20 Dec 2012 Member No.: 58,984 |
Hi all,
I received this letter.(Attached) -Letter of claim ( pre-action protocol ) requesting a reply form and financial statement Prior to this I have employed an ignore strategy. This was based on the fact the parking charge notice was totally unjustified. I parked in complex where parking is free and essentially unrestricted - no overnight only (Feb 2022). I parked in a bay that appeared to a parking bay. Retrospectively it appears it has some faded yellow hatching marks. I think anyone with any sense would conclude it was a legitimate parking bay. I think they have no leg to stand on wrt the notice being reasonable. Want some advice about what next steps I should do? Chances of going to court? Its a matter of principle and I will not pay a single penny to them prior to court. Can anyone advise how long the court session is likely to last? many thanks Yas This post has been edited by yasseral1: Wed, 22 Feb 2023 - 19:34 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Wed, 22 Feb 2023 - 19:32
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Wed, 22 Feb 2023 - 19:49
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,363 Joined: 9 Apr 2021 Member No.: 112,205 |
You'll need to use a third party site like Imgur to upload any images.
For future reference, ignoring private parking charges is generally unwise. Court is a last resort, and courts expect parties involved in a dispute to try to resolve the matter without the need to go to court - to that end, if you think a parking charge is not owed, you should contact the parking company to explain why (they wouldn't listen, but it would at least demonstrate that you have acted reasonably and tried to deal with the matter). It would be useful to see images of the original notice you received, as well as photos showing what the area where the vehicle was parked looked like at the time. If what you have at this stage is a Letter of Claim, court itself is potentially still a fair way away, assuming they follow through with a claim at all. You'll first need to respond to the Letter of Claim (search on here for examples of how to reply to these, I'll try and find a link to one), then if they do start a claim, you'll need to file a defence and witness statements. There's a guide to the entire process here: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discus...omment_64350585 This post has been edited by DWMB2: Wed, 22 Feb 2023 - 19:53 -------------------- Useful Links (for private parking charges):
Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) Schedule 4 | British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice | International Parking Community (IPC) Code of Practice |
|
|
Wed, 22 Feb 2023 - 21:50
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13 Joined: 20 Dec 2012 Member No.: 58,984 |
Thank you for your reply
Latest letter: https://ibb.co/QM9BBJg Original letter: https://ibb.co/bKR0sWZ pics: https://ibb.co/YQrbF27 https://ibb.co/nMYNDz2 https://ibb.co/m9vSTv8 thank you for your link. Will have a look. This post has been edited by yasseral1: Wed, 22 Feb 2023 - 22:11 |
|
|
Wed, 22 Feb 2023 - 22:13
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13 Joined: 20 Dec 2012 Member No.: 58,984 |
22/02/2023
UK Parking Control Limited Union House, 111 New Union Street Coventry CV1 2NT. Dear Sir or Madam Subject access request ( Data Protection Act 2018 / General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) ) [NAME & ADDRESS) Please supply the data about me that I am entitled to under data protection law relating to myself. I require ALL photos taken - all letters/emails sent and received, including any appeal correspondence earlier - all data held, all evidence they will rely on, and a full copy of the PCN, NTK If you need any more data from me to confirm my identity please let me know as soon as possible. It may be helpful for you to know that data protection law requires you to respond to a request for data within one calendar month. If you do not normally deal with these requests, please pass this letter to your Data Protection Officer, or relevant staff member. If you need advice on dealing with this request, the Information Commissioner’s Office can assist you. Its website is ico.org.uk or it can be contacted on 0303 123 1113. Yours faithfully -Is the above a reasonable SAR ? -When I email DCB legal do I have to complete the response form? -Apart from including the statements below. do I need to include anything else. (a) I am seeking debt advice but I deny any debt and the case must be put 'on hold' for not less than 30 days under the PAP for debt claims 2017. (b) I have sent your client a SAR Thank you for taking the time to read my posts and respond ( Apologies for coming across as an Newbie) This post has been edited by yasseral1: Wed, 22 Feb 2023 - 22:16 |
|
|
Wed, 22 Feb 2023 - 22:18
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,363 Joined: 9 Apr 2021 Member No.: 112,205 |
Rather than asking them if they need any further information, you may wish to speed the process up by sending this with the SAR - usually we suggest sending 2 different utility bills or similar. Something that proves your name/address and that you are indeed the data subject in question.
Also do this by email if possible - DPO@ukparkingcontrol.com -------------------- Useful Links (for private parking charges):
Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) Schedule 4 | British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice | International Parking Community (IPC) Code of Practice |
|
|
Wed, 22 Feb 2023 - 22:21
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 6,324 Joined: 18 Aug 2016 From: Manchester Member No.: 86,486 |
Yes it's a reasonable SAR, but attach copies of 2 recent redacted utility bills as proof of I D under the GDPR law, otherwise they will be delay the SAR reply until you send I D after they request it
Do NOT complete the response form, but do deny the alleged debt and add the 30 days hold notice whilst you seek debt management advice Then prepare for the almost inevitable court claim, read the thread on mse parking forum where dcb legal keep discontinuing too, plus the newbies faq sticky thread in announcements there |
|
|
Sat, 25 Mar 2023 - 23:46
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13 Joined: 20 Dec 2012 Member No.: 58,984 |
Dear Friends (In particular DWMB2 and Redx),
I sent my SAR and got a count court claim form. https://ibb.co/sqG0GMc https://ibb.co/6nS7JR2 https://ibb.co/16stKJS https://ibb.co/HHcZpkX https://ibb.co/qNznLtH These are the SAR documents & photos (plus my own photos) https://ibb.co/YZ2ck7M https://ibb.co/fdvtY1h https://ibb.co/XykJVny https://ibb.co/cX9BGRG https://ibb.co/r7QkLdX https://ibb.co/x5SvgLr https://ibb.co/6y2mSHP I think my main line of defence for me is around the poor markings on the floor. DWMB2- Thank you for the Money saving expert forum link. I read the page. A few questions: MCOS do I fill that or the county court claim form or both? Apart from paragraph 3 which seem to be my defence in my own words do I include the entire 27 paragraphs? Any other advice on what to do next would be really appreciated- especially wrt what i should focus on wrt my own defence. Thank you all. Y This post has been edited by yasseral1: Sun, 26 Mar 2023 - 22:36 |
|
|
Sun, 26 Mar 2023 - 07:35
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 6,324 Joined: 18 Aug 2016 From: Manchester Member No.: 86,486 |
What is the issue date on the claim form.? ( it's redacted on the picture link.) also you did not redact the password on the right, so remove it, redact it properly and add a new link
There are only 2 items to do on MCOL, nothing else, plus no posting anything eithrr 1) complete the AOS online on MCOL as described over on mse parking forum in the newbies faq sticky thread in announcements, plus read the first few posts in the defence template thread too You do that AOS online at least 5 days after the issue date on the claim form, but before day 19 following the issue date. ( do NOT fill in the defence box at all, leave it well alone.) 2) you check your MCOL claim history regularly, at least once a week until they transfer everything to your local nominated civil court and it says so Your defence is all the paragraphs in the defence template by coupon mad plus the statement of truth, so yes, all 27 or more, ideally by using the recent defence draft by johny86 as seen in this informative thread https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discus...gal-help-please You only change or adapt paragraphs 2 & 3, nothing else is amended although sometimes people do add to it You can post your proposal for paragraphs 2 & 3 below for critique, not the rest on here because only your work needs checking When completed, you will email the defence pdf as an attachment to the ccbcaq email address to be logged by the CCBC, during office hours only, to avoid mishaps You do not fill in the defence box at all, or the paper form either, they are NOT TO BE USED AT ALL After emailing it, you check for the email auto receipt within the hour, followed by checking your claim history a few days later, to ensure that the defence was correctly accepted and logged by the CCBC in Northampton |
|
|
Sun, 26 Mar 2023 - 13:06
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,060 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
I think my main line of defence for me is around the poor markings on the floor.
But they're clear in the photos. I parked in a bay that appeared to a parking bay. Retrospectively it appears it has some faded yellow hatching marks. I think anyone with any sense would conclude it was a legitimate parking bay. Only if they were parking a scooter or motorbike! IMO, you've misread this from day 1. It has nothing to do with the yellow marks per se because these are NOT in a bay, they're immediately adjacent for the purpose of keeping extra room between 'disabled' bays and normal bays. The fact that any part of your car was parked over these markings is clear and unarguable evidence that the car was not parked within the markings of the adjacent bay which markings are NOT hatched, they're simply markings which form a quadrilateral. In short, your car was not parked wholly within the bay to the driver's side - the bay marking line clearly runs under the car. As it happens, that part of your car which was outside the bay was sitting on a yellow hatched area which is there to serve the needs of the disabled bay to your left. IMO, a judge would not think twice about coming down hard on you if you persist with the faint hatching line because: a. It's not germane, and b. The context is prospectively disadvantaging a BB holder trying to use the bay to the left legitimately. Be careful about your approach which IMO should be...I can see that the car should not have been parked there etc... and the driver doesn't really have a defence other than carelessness but ....procedural issues. |
|
|
Sun, 26 Mar 2023 - 13:32
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,363 Joined: 9 Apr 2021 Member No.: 112,205 |
QUOTE I think my main line of defence for me is around the poor markings on the floor. But they're clear in the photos. Indeed - the markings could well do with a respray as they are fading, but they don't seem to have faded to the extent that they are no longer visible, or give the false impression that they are marking out a parking bay. -------------------- Useful Links (for private parking charges):
Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) Schedule 4 | British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice | International Parking Community (IPC) Code of Practice |
|
|
Sun, 26 Mar 2023 - 15:21
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,074 Joined: 17 Nov 2015 Member No.: 80,686 |
|
|
|
Sun, 26 Mar 2023 - 22:39
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13 Joined: 20 Dec 2012 Member No.: 58,984 |
What is the issue date on the claim form.? ( it's redacted on the picture link.) also you did not redact the password on the right, so remove it, redact it properly and add a new link There are only 2 items to do on MCOL, nothing else, plus no posting anything eithrr 1) complete the AOS online on MCOL as described over on mse parking forum in the newbies faq sticky thread in announcements, plus read the first few posts in the defence template thread too You do that AOS online at least 5 days after the issue date on the claim form, but before day 19 following the issue date. ( do NOT fill in the defence box at all, leave it well alone.) 2) you check your MCOL claim history regularly, at least once a week until they transfer everything to your local nominated civil court and it says so Your defence is all the paragraphs in the defence template by coupon mad plus the statement of truth, so yes, all 27 or more, ideally by using the recent defence draft by johny86 as seen in this informative thread https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discus...gal-help-please You only change or adapt paragraphs 2 & 3, nothing else is amended although sometimes people do add to it You can post your proposal for paragraphs 2 & 3 below for critique, not the rest on here because only your work needs checking When completed, you will email the defence pdf as an attachment to the ccbcaq email address to be logged by the CCBC, during office hours only, to avoid mishaps You do not fill in the defence box at all, or the paper form either, they are NOT TO BE USED AT ALL After emailing it, you check for the email auto receipt within the hour, followed by checking your claim history a few days later, to ensure that the defence was correctly accepted and logged by the CCBC in Northampton Thanks for the advice. I redacted the password and reuploaded the page. The issue date was from the county court was 20/3/23. I will work on the above over the next few days |
|
|
Sun, 26 Mar 2023 - 23:05
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13 Joined: 20 Dec 2012 Member No.: 58,984 |
I think my main line of defence for me is around the poor markings on the floor. But they're clear in the photos. I parked in a bay that appeared to a parking bay. Retrospectively it appears it has some faded yellow hatching marks. I think anyone with any sense would conclude it was a legitimate parking bay. Only if they were parking a scooter or motorbike! IMO, you've misread this from day 1. It has nothing to do with the yellow marks per se because these are NOT in a bay, they're immediately adjacent for the purpose of keeping extra room between 'disabled' bays and normal bays. The fact that any part of your car was parked over these markings is clear and unarguable evidence that the car was not parked within the markings of the adjacent bay which markings are NOT hatched, they're simply markings which form a quadrilateral. In short, your car was not parked wholly within the bay to the driver's side - the bay marking line clearly runs under the car. As it happens, that part of your car which was outside the bay was sitting on a yellow hatched area which is there to serve the needs of the disabled bay to your left. IMO, a judge would not think twice about coming down hard on you if you persist with the faint hatching line because: a. It's not germane, and b. The context is prospectively disadvantaging a BB holder trying to use the bay to the left legitimately. Be careful about your approach which IMO should be...I can see that the car should not have been parked there etc... and the driver doesn't really have a defence other than carelessness but ....procedural issues. https://imgbb.com/XykJVny Sorry did you see this photo above? The marking to the drivers side is right to the edge of the car. They can't have it both ways. If they wish to say the yellow hatch marks are legit then so is the driver side line. In which case their argument that the bay is clearly marked goes out the window. The bay did not have any sign that said anything about it being a bay for motor bike or such. Therefore no car would have fitted into such a bay. Also to add there is a white line in front of the car. So at least 2 out of the 3 sides are marked. The third side -passenger side doesn't have an edge to the marking indicating the start/end of a disabled bay. This is what i would be expecting to mark the edge of a disabled bay. The red annotation line and arrows are mine. https://ibb.co/56yKmVW The yellow faded hatched marks have no resemblance to what should be expected. I think this adjacent bay previously was not a disabled bay but has subsequently been turned into disabled bay. Even then it has been converted sometime ago as the yellow hatchings have faded +++. But I think the original old white lines were not removed properly when they changed them and that's why we can see multiple white lines and a space that does not fit for cars. I guess my next question is that is an insufficiently marked bay an appropriate place to park from a defense point of view? Is it not their responsibility to mark out the bays? If it isn't marked properly is that a defense I can use? The other thing to add is the car park does not charge for its use, its free- I think they have max duration/overnight use clause. I hope you can further advise as to be best line of defense. I genuinely feel that the line marks have caught me out. I wouldn't have intentionally parked blocking a disabled bay access. This post has been edited by yasseral1: Sun, 26 Mar 2023 - 23:32 |
|
|
Mon, 27 Mar 2023 - 08:04
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 6,324 Joined: 18 Aug 2016 From: Manchester Member No.: 86,486 |
With an issue date of 20 March 2023, do your AOS online on MCOL this week ideally, just that AOS, nothing else
The claim form came from the Business Centre, not the county Court, no court has been allocated yet Signage including markings etc, plus no landowner authority are 2 key elements in any defence. ( no S in the word Defence.), so are already included in the defence template by coupon mad You can elaborate on those issues plus anything else in your Witness Statement in several months time, adding your Exhibits etc with the WS, so yes put your signs and markings issues into the WS, but for now you are constructing paragraphs 2 & 3 of your Defence, because 95%of the defence has already been done for you by coupon mad on mse parking forum in announcements You must concentrate on those 2 paragraphs providing that you complete the AOS ASAP this week, online, following the mse guidance Your deadline date would then be 4pm, 33 days after the issue date, so add 33 days to the issue date, meaning that it's due about late april, but preferably do it a few days before in case of any problems |
|
|
Tue, 2 May 2023 - 17:23
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13 Joined: 20 Dec 2012 Member No.: 58,984 |
So after all this I screwed up. I mistook the 33 days as 33 days from my Aos submission. Redx- I am aware that you said to reply in Late April but for some reason it didn't register at the time.
Apparently, a judgement was issued against me- 28th April Need some advise as what to do next.... Should I ask the judgement to be set aside or pay up ( if latter how do I do that)? I haven't yet received anything in the post. Thanks, Yasser |
|
|
Tue, 2 May 2023 - 17:34
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 6,324 Joined: 18 Aug 2016 From: Manchester Member No.: 86,486 |
If you missed the deadline and they filed for Judgment, then there is little or nothing you could do apart from pay the judgment in full ASAP, to avoid the CCJ affecting you, certainly pay this month, before the 30 days is up, so before the 25th, so pay the lawyer if they are using one,, by contacting them, or only pay the claimant if no lawyers are involved, the details are on the left side of the claim form you received a month or two ago, so read it again, payment will be whatever the judgment says, when it comes, but its probably the figure on that claim form
A set aside would cost you £275 with almost no chance of it being allowed, plus probably no chance of getting it back either, never mind that if it was you would have to defend the original claim too, so 2 separate court cases, with possibly 2 different judges, so it could cost you getting on for £500 if attempted You snooze, you lose, your tardiness cost you big time here, as did ignoring from the outset, so attention to detail is crucial, especially as I did warn you weeks ago about your deadline being over a week ago This post has been edited by Redx: Tue, 2 May 2023 - 17:53 |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 16:11 |