We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
UKPC & DCNL Final Notice of Debt Recovery
Comments
-
Just been back over the entire thread and all the way through we have not been told the full name, it has always been just DCBL, hence supplying the wrong e-mail address.2
-
Ah no!! It is DCB Limited NOT Legal. I guess I have now potentially messed things up by emailing Legal!Umkomaas said:
Whoa! Tell me if I'm wrong, but it is not DCB Legal who are writing to you, it's DCB Limited? Don't involve the legal arm of DCB unless or until DCB Legal write to you. That's what you're trying to filibuster out via correspondence with DCB Limited.Brandon9 said:Info@dcblegal.co.uk is the correct email. I have just fired over email number one. They aim to respond within 10 working days.0 -
Who knows? It's wait and see, but you won't have helped yourself any, that's for certain.Brandon9 said:
Ah no!! It is DCB Limited NOT Legal. I guess I have now potentially messed things up by emailing Legal!Umkomaas said:
Whoa! Tell me if I'm wrong, but it is not DCB Legal who are writing to you, it's DCB Limited? Don't involve the legal arm of DCB unless or until DCB Legal write to you. That's what you're trying to filibuster out via correspondence with DCB Limited.Brandon9 said:Info@dcblegal.co.uk is the correct email. I have just fired over email number one. They aim to respond within 10 working days.Please note, we are not a legal advice forum. I personally don't get involved in critiquing court case Defences/Witness Statements, so unable to help on that front. Please don't ask. .
I provide only my personal opinion, it is not a legal opinion, it is simply a personal one. I am not a lawyer.
Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.#Private Parking Firms - Killing the High Street1 -
Not sure I want to want as more money could be added to the £160! !!!!!!Umkomaas said:
Who knows? It's wait and see, but you won't have helped yourself any, that's for certain.Brandon9 said:
Ah no!! It is DCB Limited NOT Legal. I guess I have now potentially messed things up by emailing Legal!Umkomaas said:
Whoa! Tell me if I'm wrong, but it is not DCB Legal who are writing to you, it's DCB Limited? Don't involve the legal arm of DCB unless or until DCB Legal write to you. That's what you're trying to filibuster out via correspondence with DCB Limited.Brandon9 said:Info@dcblegal.co.uk is the correct email. I have just fired over email number one. They aim to respond within 10 working days.
0 -
Why would you think that ? You have told DCBL you are not a mug because they thought you were by adding fake amounts.Brandon9 said:
Ah no!! It is DCB Limited NOT Legal. I guess I have now potentially messed things up by emailing Legal!Umkomaas said:
Whoa! Tell me if I'm wrong, but it is not DCB Legal who are writing to you, it's DCB Limited? Don't involve the legal arm of DCB unless or until DCB Legal write to you. That's what you're trying to filibuster out via correspondence with DCB Limited.Brandon9 said:Info@dcblegal.co.uk is the correct email. I have just fired over email number one. They aim to respond within 10 working days.
UKPC were using CST Law to chase up old tickets, they failed and are now under investigation by the SRA. DCBL took over hence your UKPC claim. It's obvious that UKPC are only using DCBL as a public convenience, a freebie service to see how many people they can mug.
UKPC have their own preferred legal which is NOT DCBL.
If DCBL are stupid enough to go for a claim, they flaw themselves by adding fakery and worst of all, we have seen claims being signed by a YASMIN Mia who signs as a statement of truth ?? THE FAKERY IS NOT TRUE.
It won't be too far away that the SRA will investigate DCBL
0 -
£160 IS FAKE ..... TICKET WAS £100 .... And DCBL have no legal right to add £60Brandon9 said:
Not sure I want to want as more money could be added to the £160! !!!!!!Umkomaas said:
Who knows? It's wait and see, but you won't have helped yourself any, that's for certain.Brandon9 said:
Ah no!! It is DCB Limited NOT Legal. I guess I have now potentially messed things up by emailing Legal!Umkomaas said:
Whoa! Tell me if I'm wrong, but it is not DCB Legal who are writing to you, it's DCB Limited? Don't involve the legal arm of DCB unless or until DCB Legal write to you. That's what you're trying to filibuster out via correspondence with DCB Limited.Brandon9 said:Info@dcblegal.co.uk is the correct email. I have just fired over email number one. They aim to respond within 10 working days.
The courts are well aware of this scam and will deduct the fake £60 and normally any interest that is added. So back to basics, the ticket is £100, court cost £25 and legal fee £50
That's £175 v £160 and if the judge sees the fakery, especially possible contempt arising from a statement of truth which is not true, he could award you £95 in costs and dismiss the case
Let's wait to see if DCBL thinks the court is a mug ??0 -
Stop panicking man! I told you how to play this out on 7th May, by filibustering to day 60 before the 6th anniversary of the charge. Well, happy days, you're there, today is day 60. So even if you were to get a LBC right now, you can drag it out over the line.Brandon9 said:
Not sure I want to want as more money could be added to the £160! !!!!!!Umkomaas said:
Who knows? It's wait and see, but you won't have helped yourself any, that's for certain.Brandon9 said:
Ah no!! It is DCB Limited NOT Legal. I guess I have now potentially messed things up by emailing Legal!Umkomaas said:
Whoa! Tell me if I'm wrong, but it is not DCB Legal who are writing to you, it's DCB Limited? Don't involve the legal arm of DCB unless or until DCB Legal write to you. That's what you're trying to filibuster out via correspondence with DCB Limited.Brandon9 said:Info@dcblegal.co.uk is the correct email. I have just fired over email number one. They aim to respond within 10 working days.Why not email DCB Limited today and ask them some inane question just so they don't hand over the file today to DCB Legal, then the legal arm will really be in some difficulty to issue proceedings in time. Day 60 is the knife-edge date, so if you can drag it out another week, it will be pretty safe then.30 day deadline to respond to any LBC they might issue, then a further 30 day extension to seek debt advice.Please note, we are not a legal advice forum. I personally don't get involved in critiquing court case Defences/Witness Statements, so unable to help on that front. Please don't ask. .
I provide only my personal opinion, it is not a legal opinion, it is simply a personal one. I am not a lawyer.
Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.#Private Parking Firms - Killing the High Street2 -
Not sure I want to want as more money could be added to the £160! !!!!!!
The added £60 is amost certainly unlawful, read thisExcel 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''.
Any further sums are also likely to be rejected by a judge. This is a scam, you do not need to be defensive, you are not dealing with John Lewis.
You never know how far you can go until you go too far.0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.7K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.4K Spending & Discounts
- 245.4K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.6K Life & Family
- 259.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards

