Custom House Quay Falmouth

Pastty

Hi everyone, received a letter form DCBL regarding my parking ticket in Custom House Quay !
 Custom House Quay Falmouth — MoneySavingExpert Forum

Firstly cannot believe after nearly 3 years I get a letter from DCBL for £170 !
Is this another ignore letter ?

Any advice greatly appreciated !

KeithP

Is it a debt collector's letter or is it a Letter of Claim?

The fourth and second posts respectively of the NEWBIES thread will help you deal with either/both.

Coupon-mad

Interesting that CEL are using DCBLtd, we assume not DCBLegal?

Le_Kirk

I see your other post: - https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5983654/custom-house-quay-falmouth/p1 is closed; I suggest ask one of the board guides @savvy or @soolin to reopen it so  you can continue on there as it contains all the details we will need.

Pastty

Le_Kirk said:

I see your other post: - https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5983654/custom-house-quay-falmouth/p1 is closed; I suggest ask one of the board guides @savvy or @soolin to reopen it so  you can continue on there as it contains all the details we will need.

I wondered why I could not add to the post  thanks Le Kirk

Pastty

KeithP said:

Is it a debt collector's letter or is it a Letter of Claim?

The fourth and second posts respectively of the NEWBIES thread will help you deal with either/both.

Main heading,

Notice of Debt Recovery - Unpaid Parking Charge of £170

You have an unpaid parking charge and Direct Collection Bailiffs Limited (DCBL) have been instructed to collect the outstanding balance on behalf of our client. The parking charge was issued because the vehicle was parked in contravention of the terms and conditions outlined on the signage as agreed to by the driver when the vehicle entered and parked on private land.

It goes on about the Supreme Court Decision about Parking Charges quoting the case 

https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2013-0280-judgement.pdf 
Edited to say no longer available to view !!!


Also no longer to appeal the parking charge. Your next opportunity to dispute the charge would be if the matter was taken to court.

You now have 14 days from the date of this letter (24/03/22) to either pay the outstanding amount or call us to discuss repayment. This case is not subject to high court or bailiff action, however should you fail to contact us, we will recommend to our client the commencement of legal action against you.

This letter is not subject to high court or bailliff action.



So what do you reckon  everyone !

Trainerman

DCBLtd, and 14 days. Debt collector rubbish, useful for lining the parrot's cage but not much else

Fruitcake

Trainerman said:

DCBLtd, and 14 days. Debt collector rubbish, useful for lining the parrot's cage but not much else

Poor quality bog-roll if there is another shortage?
Making paper logs for a wood burning stove?


DCB Limited = powerless debt collector. Ignore.
DCB Legal = solicitor. Don't ignore (nor any other solicitor).

Trainerman

Fruitcake said:

Trainerman said:

DCBLtd, and 14 days. Debt collector rubbish, useful for lining the parrot's cage but not much else

Making paper logs for a wood burning stove?



.

Funny you should say that @Fruitcake. I have a wood burner and reckon I will soon be able to give a proper consumer guide to various  debt collector letters as fire lighters 

D_P_Dance

 I get a letter from DCBL for £170 !

They have added what appears to be an extra unlawful amount of £70 or debt collection.

This amounts to double recovery and Judges all over the country are dismissing these spurious additions. Indeed some judges have dismissed entire claims because of this. Read this and complain to Trading Standards and your MP,

Excel v Wilkinson

At the Bradford County Court, District Judge Claire Jackson (now HHJ Jackson, a Specialist Civil Circuit Judge) decided to hear a 'test case' a few months ago, where £60 had been added to a parking charge despite Judges up and down the country repeatedly disallowing that sum and warning parking firms not to waste court time with such spurious claims.   That case was Excel v Wilkinson: G4QZ465V, heard in July 2020 and leave to appeal was refused and that route was not pursued.  The Judge concluded that such claims are proceedings with 'an improper collateral purpose'.   This Judge - and others who have since copied her words and struck dozens of cases out in late 2020 and into 2021 - went into significant detail and concluded that parking operators (such as this Claimant) are seeking to circumvent CPR 27.14 as well as breaching the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   DJ Hickinbottom has recently struck more cases out in that court area, stating: ''I find that striking out this claim is the only appropriate manner in which the disapproval of the court can be shown''.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/16qovzulab1szem/G4QZ465V Excel v Wilkinson.pdf?dl=0

However, VCS appealed this so it may not apply in all cases, read this

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ntksx9g7177ahyg/VCS v Percy v1 Amendments (2).pdf?dl=0Also read this

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6279348/witness-statements-2-transcripts-re-parking-firms-false-costs-recorder-cohen-qc-judgment-2021/p1

Also this,

"Abuse of process – the quantum

13. In addition to the disputed Parking Charge Notice claim amount of £100, the Claimant has added a sum of £60 that is disingenuously described variously as 'debt collection costs', ‘additional charges levied to cover the cost of recovery’, ‘additional administration costs’, ‘debt recovery costs’, ‘initial legal costs’ and ‘recovery costs’. The added £60 constitutes double recovery and the court is invited to find the quantum claimed is false and an abuse of process as was found by District Judge Claire Jackson (now HHJ Jackson, a Specialist Civil Circuit Judge) in Excel vs Wilkinson: G4QZ465V, a similar case in which £60 had been added to a parking charge, heard in July 2020 (the transcript of which is exhibit XX-04). The Judge concluded that such claims are proceedings with 'an improper collateral purpose'. Leave to appeal was refused and that route was not pursued."

Consider complaining to The SRA about the solicitor, if one is involved They are fully aware of these unlawful nature of most of thse additions, which are invariabky disallowed by the judge, yet the persist in adding them..

https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/problems/