DCB Legal Letter of Claim

Jimmead

Hi All
I'm afraid I've come to this forum far too late with an issue that you all have clearly discussed to death!
Very sorry to open up old wounds, but I need advice please:

Not sure if you can help at this stage?

On the 6th of June 2019, my daughter parked within the University of Hertfordshire car park. She was a student and using the Uni library for extended revision for her final exams.

She bought a ticket via the phone app for the maximum period (6hrs) then aware of her ticket expiry time, bought another ticket within the accepted grace period of 30 minutes, to enable further parking into the evening? We do have digital copy of the ticket purchases AND bank statements to confirm.

On the 11th of June 2019, she received a parking charge notice from First Parking alleging that she had parked within an area reserved for Staff use.

She appealed to the managing company First Parking on the basis that she was unaware of the staff parking area restriction, and that this was not clear on site?

First Parking refused her appeal on the basis that she had previously incurred a parking charge on the same site?

The charge was £80.00 reduced to £40.00 for early settlement.

She did not pay or take further action.

On the 22nd of August 2019 She received a letter from National Debt Collections requesting payment of £150.00.

She did not pay or take further action.

On the 6th of October 2019 She received a letter from DCB Limited requesting payment of £160.00?

She did not pay or take further action.

On the 17th of February 2021, she received a Letter of Claim from DCB Legal threatening court proceedings if she did not pay £140.00 within 30 days?

I have now been nominated by my daughter to represent her in this issue and this has been acknowledged by both First Parking AND DCB Legal. I have entered discussion with both via email, firstly with a SAR request and subsequently requesting their evidence confirming that She was parked in an area within the car park restricted for staff usage, which they are unable to provide?

They have provided photographic evidence that her car was on site for the period in question, which we have not disputed, but nothing that PROVES the car was parked in an area reserved for staff vehicles

They are now refusing further discussion with me and state that I must pay the £140.00 by the 9th of April or proceedings will be implemented against my Daughter?

Whilst the final invoice of £140.00 is not a great sum of money, and I am tempted to pay this to just make them go away, the principle is jarring?

Am I too late to seek your advice on this, and should I just pay them?

Many thanks for your advice in anticipation.

Best regards, Jim Mead

nosferatu1001

So have you seen any pictures of the site? Was it ANPR (you can always tell, any pictures are taken high up) OR manual? Does it show passing signs into "staff only" or similar? 


Why on earthy would you pay? 
The max loss at court is on  the order of PCN + £100, so about £40 more, but you cost them about the same in unrecoverable legal fees. 

D_P_Dance

On the 17th of February 2021, she received a Letter of Claim from DCB Legal threatening court proceedings if she did not pay £140.00 within 30 days?

That extra £40 is very likely to be unlawful, read this and complain.to your MP.

Excel v Wilkinson.

At the Bradford County Court, District Judge Claire Jackson (now HHJ Jackson, a Specialist Civil Circuit Judge) decided to hear a 'test case' a few months ago, where £60 had been added to a parking charge despite Judges up and down the country repeatedly disallowing that sum and warning parking firms not to waste court time with such spurious claims.   That case was Excel v Wilkinson: G4QZ465V, heard in July 2020 and leave to appeal was refused and that route was not pursued.  The Judge concluded that such claims are proceedings with 'an improper collateral purpose'.   This Judge - and others who have since copied her words and struck dozens of cases out in late 2020 and into 2021 - went into significant detail and concluded that parking operators (such as this Claimant) are seeking to circumvent CPR 27.14 as well as breaching the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   DJ Hickinbottom has recently struck more cases out in that court area, stating: ''I find that striking out this claim is the only appropriate manner in which the disapproval of the court can be shown''.

nosferatu1001

DP - its an extra £60 still. £80 PCN

Le_Kirk

I have now been nominated by my daughter to represent her in this issue and this has been acknowledged by both First Parking AND DCB Legal.

That may work for the PPC and it's tame legal but when/if it comes to the court claim everything must be done in the name of the person named on the claim; you can help but your daughter must sign and understand what she is signing.

beamerguy

The debt collector rubbish is history now and via the game of musical chairs these bods play, DCBL are as usual faking it by adding £60.
You can prove she paid and they cannot prove where she parked,  ... that is what you are saying.

The DCBL letter, is it a letter before claim or just another debt collection letter ?  The latter can be ignored, a real letter before claim must give you 30 days to respond.

WHY PAY, when you have more proof than them. .  No point in phoning DCBL, everything must be in writing now .. email

You can now play pass the parcel and ask DCBL one very important question ..... what is their legal authority to add £60 ?    Thus far we have never seen an answer from DCBL ... BECAUSE THEY HAVE NONE ..... and if they cannot explain, it makes their claim unreliable which applies to every claim DCBL bring ?
Whilst you can write the letter, it must come from your daughter

See what happens with DCBL in this dedicated thread
DCBL letters ... forum group thread
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6237177/dcbl-letters-forum-group-thread#latest

And read about a case (another company but they are all the same) where the claim was struck out for abuse of process ..... that's the fake £60 add-on
EXCEL v WILKINSON ..... claim struck out for ABUSE OF PROCESS.  DDJ Jackson who is now HHJ Jackson made this ruling.  
https://www.dropbox.com/s/16qovzulab1szem/G4QZ465V Excel v Wilkinson.pdf?dl=0

Coupon-mad

Why not read the other Uni of Hertfordshire threads?  There are others, possibly even one at court claim stage.

As has been said YOU CANNOT respond to court claim forms in your name once you get to that stage.  She is the Defendant, everything in her name (but you can do the donkey work - but in her name).  Don't get this wrong at court claim stage - that is where she is likely to win the case.  But she is the Defendant, not you.

Jimmead

Thank you everyone; I was tiring of this debacle, but you've given me renewed energy.
So, just to clarify; Once (IF) court claims forms are issued, we'll have opportunity to submit a defence for consideration, which may prompt a judge to refuse the issue court time? And in practice ONLY my Daughter can respond to these papers (using my words-advised by your good selves)?
So Ultimately, I'm not going to get hit with significant legal fees EVEN if a judgement goes against us in this case?
I will read up on other Uni of Herts threads as well?
Best regards, Jim

Redx

I doubt that any judge will refuse court time , but yes your daughter would have several hoops to jump through , the defence being one of them in the early stages

Yes , your daughter is an adult , so must either deal with it herself , or employ a legal eagle such a a solicitor to represent her , not you , but y can definitely assist her , a gopher

A typical loss in court for one PCN is approximately £200

Le_Kirk

If you read the NEWBIE sticky, as you say you are going to, you will find that the maximum is the original speculative invoice of £100 plus £25 filing fee plus £25 hearing fee plus £50 legal costs (if the claimant uses a solicitor) so the most you/your daughter would be out is £200

nosferatu1001

The newbies thread takes you through the complete courts process, so it makes it clear that the defendant, named on the claim form, defends the claim, buit of course can get help from you. What you must never, ever do is change the name of the defendant.