Smart Parking, DCB Legal court claim 2025

lilycat2020

@Le_Kirk thank you for working the deadline for me without me having to ask. 

As regards my post on 28/08 the letters from the DBS legal and smart parking always have  standard wording contained in them saying that the registered keeper is liable. So I assumed that was correct until I read AND understood all the thread.

The Driver sent me details of what happened and I just posted it for opinion because the car is registered with a valid blue badge at the hospital site and was parked in a marked disabled bay. 
Hope that clarifies the situation. 

Coupon-mad

lilycat2020 said:

@ 1505grandad

What does FWIW and Op mean?
Sorry I'm new to all of this 

You can Google them as they are universal forum and social media acronyms:

FWIW - for what it's worth

OP - original poster (you are the OP).

lilycat2020

@Coupon-mad thank you for explaining what they mean. I don't use social media and didn't think of googling them.
 

lilycat2020

@Coupon-mad

I've made the suggested amendments. Please see below. 

Once completed, my understanding is that I have to complete the defence using MCOL (and NOT email the defence because defences are getting lost in the 'post'. I would be very much grateful if you would confirm that is the correct course of action. 

Many thanks for your help so far, I really would be lost without it. I genuinely can't express how much I appreciate it. Bless you all. 

Template paragraphs 1 and 2 to start.

3. The Claimant has not shown that the Defendant was in fact the driver at the time of the alleged breach of contract. There is no dispute that the driver was entitled to drive the car, and as the keeper of the vehicle, it is my right to choose not to name the driver, yet still not be lawfully held liable if an operator is not using or complying with Schedule 4.  

4. Further, regarding the Particulars of Claim paragraph 4, research has proved that this Claimant has never used the POFA 2012 and has never been able to hold registered keepers liable. This is important because the solicitor signatory of the statement of truth on this claim is knowingly or negligently misleading the court by citing that law. Despite tens of thousands of boilerplate claims from DCB Legal causing inflated default CCJs this year – as they have reportedly filed a ‘job lot’ of template bulk claims for this Claimant, all repeating the untruth about the POFA 2012 – Smart Parking has no cause of action against any registered keeper 

5.Furthermore, Driver parked the vehicle in a bay situated in the hospital site and marked as a disabled parking bay. The vehicle in question had been registered at the hospital site and as such it was reasonable for the driver to assume that parking in the marked disabled parking bay whilst displaying the valid blue badge was permitted.  

There was no signage in the area to indicate that the marked disabled parking bay was no longer in operation or parking was not permitted regardless of the vehicle being registered at the site, as such it was reasonable for the driver to assume that parking was permitted in the marked bay whilst displaying the valid blue badge. 

6.As argued, the terms on the sign were not seen and the area was not clearly marked/signed with prominent terms, the driver did not consent to - and cannot have 'breached' - an unknown contract because contract because there was no contract capable of being established. This argument is strengthened as there are not any signs in the area which negated the marked disabled parking bay for blue badge holders.  

Template paragraphs 7 - 13 )albeit re-numbered in light of my additional paragraphs. 

Coupon-mad

Once completed, my understanding is that I have to complete the defence using MCOL (and NOT email the defence because defences are getting lost in the 'post'. I would be very much grateful if you would confirm that is the correct course of action.

Yes.

If you were not the driver then add this to the end of your para 3:

The Defendant was not the driver. The Driver sent details of what happened and explained that the car is registered with a valid blue badge at the hospital site and was parked in a marked disabled bay. The Defendant has seen nothing to evidence a breach of terms.

Le_Kirk

and as the keeper of the vehicle, it is my right to choose not to name the driver,

Defences are written in the third person, so no "I", "me" or "my".  Probably better written as: -

It is the keeper's right to choose not to name the driver,