DCBLegal letter of claim

Coupon-mad

Yeah they'll get back to you alright, wasting your time with their own contrived 'SAR form' that asks if the keeper was the driver...as seen in all other Group Nexus threads you care to read.

Stanbutler

Coupon-mad said:

Yeah they'll get back to you alright, wasting your time with their own contrived 'SAR form' that asks if the keeper was the driver...as seen in all other Group Nexus threads you care to read.

So will I have to fill out their form or is there a way around it.

Coupon-mad

Yes there is.

To save us endlessly repeating ourselves, and to learn loads of useful stuff for your own preparation for your own court case from others ahead of you in this game, please read other Group Nexus SAR threads. 

I did say this as a hint for you to do so:

...as seen in all other Group Nexus threads you care to read.

Stanbutler

Coupon-mad said:

Yes there is.

To save us endlessly repeating ourselves, and to learn loads of useful stuff for your own preparation for your own court case from others ahead of you in this game, please read other Group Nexus SAR threads. 

I did say this as a hint for you to do so:

...as seen in all other Group Nexus threads you care to read.

Ok, ive done abit of searching and from what I can gather I need to respond to them by declining to use their form and remind them that they are obliged to send me any data they hold ?

Umkomaas

Stanbutler said:

Coupon-mad said:

Yes there is.

To save us endlessly repeating ourselves, and to learn loads of useful stuff for your own preparation for your own court case from others ahead of you in this game, please read other Group Nexus SAR threads. 

I did say this as a hint for you to do so:

...as seen in all other Group Nexus threads you care to read.

Ok, ive done abit of searching and from what I can gather I need to respond to them by declining to use their form and remind them that they are obliged to send me any data they hold ?

Please raise a complaint with the ICO. And, while you're at it, complain also to the BPA using their complaints portal of their website. Please do it, otherwise this rubbish perpetuates. 

Stanbutler

Umkomaas said:

Stanbutler said:

Coupon-mad said:

Yes there is.

To save us endlessly repeating ourselves, and to learn loads of useful stuff for your own preparation for your own court case from others ahead of you in this game, please read other Group Nexus SAR threads. 

I did say this as a hint for you to do so:

...as seen in all other Group Nexus threads you care to read.

Ok, ive done abit of searching and from what I can gather I need to respond to them by declining to use their form and remind them that they are obliged to send me any data they hold ?

Please raise a complaint with the ICO. And, while you're at it, complain also to the BPA using their complaints portal of their website. Please do it, otherwise this rubbish perpetuates. 

Ive not recieved a reply from the sar yet so if they reply with their form I will raise a complaint.

Coupon-mad

Aaaand Group Nexus are on the BPA board of Directors, so you will get precisely nowhere but do it anyway.

Stanbutler

Update. My MP contacted me again last week to ask if I had heard anything from dcbl (I havent) as he still has not recieved a response and was going to email them again. 
This will be his 3rd email to them.

Stanbutler

Finally after about 3 months DCBL have responded to my MP.
I could do with some advice on what to make of the response please.

I have recieved the 3 original letters from the SAR

And nothing fron DCBL since the letter of claim at the end of November 2021, I requested the 30 days to seek advice just before christmas and denied I owed the debt.
Reponse to my MP as follows.

Dear Mr Anderson,

I hope this email finds you well.

Thank you for your emails the contents of which have been noted. I have been passed the above-mentioned matter following your correspondence.

Please be advised that I am instructed by Highview Parking Limited to recover an unpaid Parking Charge (PCN) from Mr ******.

My client has been pursuing Mr ****** since the PCN was issued in July 2016, as I am sure you are aware there is a 6 year limitation period in which to pursue the debt. Mr ****** has received numerous correspondence from my client, from our sister company DCBL and now from DCB Legal in relation to the unpaid PCN.

Accordingly, my client is instructed by the Landowner to manage the Land at Broad Centre Retail Park, this includes the enforcement of PCNs when the terms of parking are not complied with. If Mr ****** was unsure about the terms of parking on the Land, he should have sought alternative parking.

When Mr ****** chose to not pay for parking on the land, he was notified by my client's signage that a £100 charge would be incurred, which would be reduced to £60 in 14 days. Further, a Notice to Keeper (NTK) sent to Mr ******, following receipt of the PCN, also included this information. When the PCN is passed to DCB Legal a further £70 is added to the £100 charge, which is the recovery charge permitted by the British Parking Association.

Mr ****** claims not to be the driver, however, he has not provided a driver nomination, as such he is being pursued on the balance of probabilities that he was the Driver as he is the Registered Keeper. Further my client can pursue Mr ****** outside of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012(POFA) and does not rely on POFA when pursuing this unpaid PCN.

Please be advised DCB Legal have paused issuing proceedings on this matter until a response was provided to you. However, there isn't any reason why DCB Legal would not continue to pursue Mr ****** for the unpaid PCN.

I hope this information has assisted you. If you require anything further, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Kind regards,

Ellen O'Donnell

Solicitor

DCB Legal Ltd

Coupon-mad

 When the PCN is passed to DCB Legal a further £70 is added to the £100 charge, which is the recovery charge permitted by the British Parking Association.

Mr ****** claims not to be the driver, however, he has not provided a driver nomination, as such he is being pursued on the balance of probabilities that he was the Driver as he is the Registered Keeper.

You MP needs to reply pointing out that both of the above are banned by the DLUHC's new code, and neither were ever allowable in law (CRA 2015 and POFA 2012).