DCB Legal Letter of Claim - What Can I Expect Next?

PTRed

Hi, 
I have read through all of the threads on this, but would appreciate any specific guidance I might need here. 
I have received a "Letter of Claim" from DCB Legal on behalf of First Parking, in relation to Lancaster University Car Park. There are four PCNs that they are claiming against me. Each PCN, according to Lancaster University, is £75 - their claim is for £615, so £315 more than the combined PCNs. The four PCNs are between 20th March 2019 and 28th August 2019. 

I don't have any records of these tickets, nor receiving PCNs - but when I recently bought a new car, I am aware that the car in question was still registered to an old address so it is possible the communication went there - I don't have any way of knowing. I think I have had maybe one or two debt collection letters sent to my current address, but I would have simply thrown these away - given I wasn't aware of any of the original claims.

The actions I have taken so far are to send the solicitors the letter asking on what legal authority they have to add £315. I have also sent them a SAR request for both the solicitors and their client (First Parking). I have sent First Parking (through their sales email) a SAR request also. I can't find any way of contacting the DPO at First Parking.

I have received a reply from DCB Legal acknowledging both emails, I have replied asking for the contact details of the DPO at First Parking (I don't expect they'll provide it.) Their reply said:

"We write in response to your correspondence received 23rd September 2020.

We note that you have raised a Subject Access Request please note this will be responded to under separate cover.

Please note we have requested further information from our Client relating to your case.

Your case will remain on hold in the meantime and we will contact you in due course."

Is there anything else that I need to do? What should I expect to happen next? 

Thanks for any help you can give - if you need any more info that I've not provided, happy to give it.

Redx

Nothing else to do , you have done the two tasks required

Wait for the replies , especially the SAR replies

Wait for a court claim pack next month from the CCBC in Northampton , meanwhile start with the coupon mad defence template , prepare your draft , get pictures of signage etc too , plus any witness statements as well

Yes it's likely that all paperwork went to the address the DVLA had , the old address , as they should do , it was your job to keep those keeper details up to date , so that is your own fault which they will milk

Good luck

PTRed

Redx said:

Nothing else to do , you have done the two tasks required

Wait for the replies , especially the SAR replies

Wait for a court claim pack next month from the CCBC in Northampton , meanwhile start with the coupon mad defence template , prepare your draft , get pictures of signage etc too , plus any witness statements as well

Yes it's likely that all paperwork went to the address the DVLA had , the old address , as they should do , it was your job to keep those keeper details up to date , so that is your own fault which they will milk

Good luck

Thanks!
I updated everything I was aware of like licence, insurance etc. Had no idea until I bought my new car that there was another thing to change! Definitely my fault of course. 

Redx

Then complain on the Mhclg and BSI website consultations , because we believe that a data subject should only need to tell the DVLA once in order to get all their details changed , not twice , especially when it's a fine of up to £1000 for each offence !!

Nothing will change unless people like you complain and make it happen , read any recent posts by coupon mad , all the info is in them !! Make a difference !!

PTRed

I'm assuming it's because there's a difference between where my location is for a driving licence and where the car itself is registered. 

Redx

A driving licence address and the address of an RK on a V5C on a private vehicle should be the same address because it's the same data subject , same person , same primary address

You updated your driving licence to the new address by informing the DVLA

You failed to inform the DVLA to update the V5C to the new address

Currently you have to inform the DVLA twice , we believe this breaks the GDPR , you wouldn't have to tell Barclays more than once for all your bank accounts and mortgage and loans etc to be changed to your new address !!

Coupon mad has mentioned this several times recently

Timeouts

PTRed said:

The actions I have taken so far are to send the solicitors the letter asking on what legal authority they have to add £315. I have also sent them a SAR request for both the solicitors and their client (First Parking). I have sent First Parking (through their sales email) a SAR request also. I can't find any way of contacting the DPO at First Parking.

As Redx says ...... just wait

You no doubt know that DCBL cannot explain the fake add-on of £315 let alone any legal authority 
DCBL has been copying this fake add-on rubbish from another legal who constantly fail in court because it is DOUBLE RECOVERY and ABUSE OF PROCESS

I hope you have read this thread as to what happens to the legals who add fake amounts

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6103933/abuse-of-process-thread-part-2/p1?new=1

Le_Kirk

The only address to contact First Parking by e-mail that I have found is sales@firstparking.co.uk, you could try that, otherwise good old fashioned snail mail!

Kate_kt

Hi there PTRed,

I have received similar correspondence in the post from DCB legal for an alleged £40 debt from 2016 (I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw this contravention date) which they have increased to £110 by adding £70 admin fees. 

I would like to follow suit and send a SAR request to Capital Car Park Control and was wondering if you could provide a template of the email you sent? Haven't got a clue what I'm doing here, even after reading all threads and advice on this site.
Any other advice is warmly welcomed!

Thanks a lot 

PTRed

Hi Kate,
I used this one - 

A SUITABLE REPLY TO SCAMMERS who are claiming fake amounts, £60 or more.
This is mainly applicable to the dodgy legals who think they know better than the courts. 
You can of course send this to the stupid debt collectors like DRP, but as they are brain dead, it will probably go over their heads.
You can adapt this letter to suit your own circumstances.  Where you see XXX you replace that with "your letter" or "Your letter before claim" etc.   I suggest you email the letter. NEVER PHONE THEM.
=============================================================
Dear Sirs,

I refer to XXX dated XXX  I am unsure that your claim is legitimate. I require that you advise me as to what legal authority you have to add an amount of £60 to your claim.  You clearly already know that this is Abuse of Process and in a recent claim made by BWLegal in Luton County Court, claim number F0DP77KP, the judge gave his reason for striking out the claim is as follows:-

The claim contains a substantial charge additional to the Parking charge which it is alleged that the Defendant contracted to pay. This additional charge is not recoverable under the Protection of Freedom Act 2012 schedule 4, nor with reference to the judgement in Parking Eye v Beavis, which expressly approved because it included costs of administration. Additionally, S71(2) of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 requires the court to consider the fairness of a contract term and the provision of additional charges falls into example 6, 10 and 14 of the indicative list of unfair terms in schedule 2 of the act. It is an Abuse of Process for the claimant to issue a knowingly inflated sum which they are not entitled to recover

As I will reference this judgment (and many others where claims have been struck out), in any claim you make together with a copy of this letter, I ask you again on what LEGAL AUTHORITY do you have to add £60 to your claim ?  Any reply from you will be shown in court and if your reply states "without prejudice", I reserve the right to advise the court that you have replied not wanting the court to read it.

This is now a very serious situation for you and I now give you the option to immediately discontinue all of your claim and you and your client bears their own costs.  In turn, I will not claim costs against your client.
Please reply within 7 days from the date of this email with your intentions

Yours faithfully

Coupon-mad

It won't get you anywhere and sounds ranty. 

Better to ask for a breakdown of the £100 PCN and a breakdown of the £60.  That puts them on the spot.

AND I KNOW I AM REPEATING MYSELF BUT PLEASE CAN EVERYONE NOW DO THIS, SECTION BY SECTION:

Please now make a real difference because not enough people have:

A TASK FOR SEPTEMBER:

The Government is (this month only) consulting about a new statutory code of practice (CoP) and framework to rein in the rogue parking firms.  Read and comment on the draft CoP proposal and the enforcement framework consultation, and get everyone you know to do the same.

You will need to register to comment on the CoP and enter an occupation even if you are retired or a homemaker, but otherwise it is easy to navigate, and comment upon each section/subsection individually. You can save comments to edit later and or submit comments once you are happy with them.

https://standardsdevelopment.bsigroup.com/projects/2020-00193#/section

You do not need to register to comment on the enforcement framework which can be found here. It has a link on page 5 to make comments.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/913272/Code_Enforcement_Framework_consultation.pdf

At the very least, we say the parking charge level should be £50/£25 or higher level £70/£35, as per Council PCNs in E&W.  

And we say the added fake 'debt recovery' costs are just double counting the cost of letters and MUST GO.  Remove that layer and you remove the ‘drivers’ behind the race to court.

HOW TO DO THE SUBMISSIONS:

Responses into the PAS 232 and MHCLG framework documents are not completely straightforward: 

On the MHCLG response, you have to answer the questions on a 1-5 scale from strongly agree to strongly disagree, and then put some commentary. No way to upload documents or alternatives.

 

On the PAS 232, you have to click on each clause and sub-clause to put your comments, and a suggested rewording of their draft.  You can see comments which other people have written!  

But, when you click ‘submit’, a message pops up to say your comments have been received, but that only applies to the particular clause you have just addressed. 

You have to click ‘submit’ separately for each individual clause response. 

Some people will be caught out by this but can revisit it and add further responses up to 12 October.