PPC chasing old invoices

fueboy

KeithP said:

By googling Novation agreement you will see that that agreement is simply changing the name of the entity that has a KADOE agreement with the DVLA from Capital Car Park Control to Capital Car Park Control Limited.

Nothing of interest to us then..

fueboy

fueboy said:

Out of nowhere.

Mr Szmidt obviously wants some Christmas spending money.

What steps should I now take?

Dear Owen,

Indeed there's a Capital Car Park Control Ltd, (Company number 12832321), which was incorporated on 24th August 2020. These invoices were issued in 2017.

You state that "our client, Terry Szmidt T/A Capital Car Park Control, is the correct Claimant in this matter. Terry Szmidt was acting as a sole trader when the PCNs were issued and therefore, our Client has the locus standi to bring a Claim. The contract was entered between yourself, and Terry Szmidt T/A Capital Car Park Control, not Capital Car Park Control Ltd"

Can you provide evidence of the contract and supply an image of the sign with the name of the debtor clearly showing?

Faithfully, fueboy.

Sound ok?

Coupon-mad

Not debtor.

Alleged creditor.

fueboy

This is why I asked 😂 can't wait for all this to be behind me!

1505grandad

"....KADOE agreement with the DVLA from Capital Car Park Control to Capital Car Park Control Limited."

Just a thought  -  wonder why the Novation states "Capital Carpark Control"  -  yet DCB Legal states their client "Terry Szmidt T/A Capital Car Park Control  -  acting as sole trader".

Galloglass

Would think there are 2 issues here. 

When Terry incorporated his access to the DVLA database would cease and his company would need to reapply, including all the checks etc. So rather than go through that hassle, the DVLA have accepted a novation agreement so his company can continue seamlessly.

Then the second issue is the "debt" to Terry rather than his company. AFAIK he could have a novation agreement where the debt could be transferred to the new company. But, as we know, selling on debt from one legal entity to another is a DVLA no-no - at the moment. 

In any case, if there was such a sale of the debt, then that agreement would have to be shown in court. So DCBL are keeping it simple, and after 6 years the "debt" becomes difficult to chase.

patient_dream

This has been going on for too long.

You have asked for the signs for 2017.  it's not just the Alleged creditor, ... does it clearly show the extra amount that DCBL claim which we all know is a fake

It will not show debt collection charges because the BPA added the Osner scam in 2018.  We also know that DCBL translate "debt collection" to "DAMAGES", not only is that rubbish ... that will not show on 2017 signs

If this was me, I would stop the ping pong letters. DCBL know they play a dodgy game with Szmidt and they have a choice now, sit in front of a judge and explain their fakery or just discontinue

CHOICES CHOICES FOR DCBL ??

fueboy

Well here is the reply anyway.

I shall sit back and wait now.

"Dear me,

 

We act for the Claimant in the above matter.

 

Our position regarding the Claimant was outlined on 28th November 2022. Our position will not be re-addressed.

 

In line with our email dated 28th November 2022, if payment of £510.00 is not paid by close of business today, a Claim will be issued. Payment can be made via bank transfer to our designated client account:-

Account Name: DCB Legal Ltd Client Account        Sort Code: 20-24-09       Account Number: 60964441       

You must quote the correct case reference (beginning ‘10’) when making payment. If you do not, we may be unable to correctly allocate the payment. If further action is taken by us as a result of an incorrect reference being quoted, you will be liable for any further fees or costs incurred. Alternatively, you can contact DCB Legal Ltd on 0203 434 0424 to make payment over the telephone.     

 

 

Kind Regards,  

 

Owen Cook 

Paralegal 

DCB Legal Ltd  

 

Tel: 0203 434 0433 | DX 23457 Runcorn"

T0sser.

patient_dream

Our position regarding the Claimant was outlined on 28th November 2022. Our position will not be re-addressed.

I like that ..... and that is your position as well. Who can break this stale mate ? well a judge of course

As said it is 100% in the hands of DCBL who will be fully aware that is not their given right to win.
They also know that nowadays judges are aware of the fake add-ons and deduct them
Not forgetting that when you win, you can claim costs against them.

NEVER EVER PHONE DCBL

And they say .... "if payment of £510.00 is not paid by close of business today, a Claim will be issued"

That's OK.  On a court claim they must sign as a statement of truth ... will the added £210 be true or false
Another choice for DCBL
This I would raise to the judge

Coupon-mad

If this was me, I would stop the ping pong letters. 

I shall sit back and wait now.

I wouldn't. Not with PCN dates just weeks away from being timed out.

Have you cited the PAP right to evidence clauses at them?

Have you saved the 'seeking debt advice/30 day hold' till last or have you already used that?

If the driver wasn't you, had you thought about naming the driver now to get this case over the 6 year line?

Have you used the letter I wrote a couple of months ago that ends with Arkell v Pressdram?