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

PTRed

Okay thanks Coupon. I've not admitted to anything at all. 

PTRed

Update:
I am emailing emailed solicitors asking for:
A breakdown of the costs associated with the £75 PCN - as referenced in signage and all subsequent communicationA breakdown of the costs for the additional £78.75 per PCNEvidence of the length of time that the car was in the car park - I dispute that the car was was actually parked in the car park. The images provided only show the car having been in the car park.
Evidence that the signage pictured was actually near where the car was parked or could have been prior to the car being parked. Any pictures of the relevant signage that are legible taken on the day the PCN was issued? All images supplied have illegible signage. A record of all payments made on the day the PCN was issued.

I have emailed the PPC, asking for the following - as it was not given in the SAR request: 

The attached does not contain, as requested:

- Dates letters were sent and where letters were sent to. I have not received any communication from First Parking to date and the attached contains no evidence of NTK. 
- PDT machine record from the day PCNs were issued


Before I send the email to solicitors - anything else I should add?

Coupon-mad

Great, as long as in your email you put these on separate numbered or bullet point lines for clarity:

A breakdown of the costs associated with the £75 PCN - as referenced in signage and all subsequent communication A breakdown of the costs for the additional £78.75 per PCN Evidence of the length of time that the car was in the car park - I dispute that the car was was actually parked in the car park.

PTRed

Yeah they are, the forum stripped out the formatting on those for some reason. 

Now is just a waiting game, they did confirm that the case "will remain on hold in the meantime" - so I'm just waiting for either a response or a court date being sent in the post?

Coupon-mad

It's only a waiting game once you've done (promise me! the submissions I told you about in my reply on 24 September at 3:28PM

It is VITAL that people sit aside an afternoon, sit down and read al sections and comment on them, on both links!

You will never, ever get a better chance to make a difference because the Government happens to be creating a draft right now and wants to hear from the public.  That will not happen again.  You need to put what your think about each section, and be heard!

PTRed

I've signed up and will do so.

Umkomaas

PTRed said:

I've signed up and will do so.

Excellent. Regulars will contribute massively, but actually very few of us have been put through the wringer you (and millions of others) have. So please hit the consultation with your very own first-hand experience. Every little helps (to make the UK a fairer place).

Kate_kt

PTRed said:

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

Hiya,

Thanks for this, but am I right in thinking this would be sent to the "debt collectors" that are adding their own costs? What I am looking for is an example of the SAR request to send to the PPC that issued the PCN 4 years ago, to find out exactly what information they have on me. Do you have a template of the SAR request?

Thanks so much!

Redx

The SAR template is in the newbies FAQ sticky thread near the top of the forum

PTRed

I've not heard back from the solicitors yet regarding the breakdown of the costs - although they did say "case put on hold". Should I chase this at any point?

Is it worth asking the PPC about the extra charges?