DCB Legal Letter of Claim for 3-4 year old PCN

KeithP

hitman126 said:

Please note, In order to identify the Registered Keeper of the vehicle, our client submitted a request for details to the DVLA. Your details were provided and thereafter notices were sent to you by our Client at your serviceable address. Those notices asked you to either make payment or, if you were not driving, nominate a driver by providing their name and full address. You did neither and as such you are now pursued on the basis that you were driving. On the balance of probabilities, if you were not the driver, you would have nominated. 

Their logic is flawed.

 On the balance of probabilities, I would suggest that the victim decided not to identify the driver as that puts a greater pressure on the parking company to pursue the claim against a keeper.

hitman126 said:

My question therefore is: "What now?"

Wait patiently for a County Court Claim Form to drop through your letterbox.

Coupon-mad

Come on, you can answer this trash -  you know what the answer really is, from this forum:

Please note, In order to identify the Registered Keeper of the vehicle, our client submitted a request for details to the DVLA. Your details were provided and thereafter notices were sent to you by our Client at your serviceable address. Those notices asked you to either make payment or, if you were not driving, nominate a driver by providing their name and full address. You did neither and as such you are now pursued on the basis that you were driving. On the balance of probabilities, if you were not the driver, you would have nominated. 

Absolute b0ll0cks.  Attach a copy of Excel v Smith to your reply (find it and read it in the Parking Prankster's case law).

beamerguy

You did neither and as such you are now pursued on the basis that you were driving. On the balance of probabilities

A very wild assumption by DCBL pretending to act as claimant and a judge. The latter being a level DCBL are not on.

Has DCBL forgotten so quickly that whoever they think they are taking to court, they are still practicing fakery with their add-ons which is unlawful

Joeyspeedbump

Hi

I sent letter to DCBL stating that the Limitations Act applied.  They have just responded stating:
"Although the contravention date exceeds a six-year period, the PCN is still pursuable at debt recovery stage"

I don't know what this means, or whether it is correct.  Any advice gratefully received.

Thanks

Coupon-mad

Reply:  ''good luck with that, and I am now reporting you - DCBLegal - to the SRA because you have a legal arm and know then limitation period''.

KeithP

Joeyspeedbump said:

Hi

I sent letter to DCBL stating that the Limitations Act applied.  They have just responded stating:
"Although the contravention date exceeds a six-year period, the PCN is still pursuable at debt recovery stage"

I don't know what this means, or whether it is correct.  Any advice gratefully received.

Thanks

@Joeyspeedbump, this is not your thread.

However, it simply means that they can chase the debt for as long as they like in the hope that you pay up, but the Limitations Act means they cannot enforce the alleged debt through the courts.

Umkomaas

Classic hijack introducing a variable (6 year old ticket) that does not apply to the OP and destined to confuse, maybe even prove costly.  

Joeyspeedbump

Thanks for the help.  I apologise if I'm in the wrong place but this was the thread my previous query was on.

Can I delete my question?  Would that help?

Coupon-mad

No, you can't edit posts yet.  

beamerguy

Joeyspeedbump said:

Hi

I sent letter to DCBL stating that the Limitations Act applied.  They have just responded stating:
"Although the contravention date exceeds a six-year period, the PCN is still pursuable at debt recovery stage"

I don't know what this means, or whether it is correct.  Any advice gratefully received.

Thanks

Just mumbo jumbo. If they wish to waste their time sending out debt letters, they are the fools  and they just waste their money.   Just let them be fools.

Without any court order, ZERO they can do and we all know in this game what to do with debt crawling letters ....... flush them down the loo where they belong.

It is complete incompetence that they failed to notice the "Limitations Act" timing

If you get any more interference from this bunch ... let us know