DCB Legal Letter of Claim over PCN

BellaCassie17

Hiya,

I received a PCN via one of those dodgy private parking companies over 2 years ago, per all of the advice relating to this company on these forums which I read in great detail over a couple of weeks, I ignored the letters.

I’ve now received this letter of claim which if I ignore they’re saying they’ll take me to court.

what do you advise I do here? Need to avoid a CCJ on my credit score as an hoping to buy a house soon but don’t really have £17p0 either!

thanks in advance 😊

patient_dream

Typical bog standard DCBL letter before claim adding a fake £70

Do we assume this is another crazy UKPC claim ?

Nothing can touch your credit rating.   If it went to court and you lost, you would have about 14 days to pay and if you did not pay ONLY THEN is a CCJ issued.   
Dodgy parking companies, debt collectors including legals CANNOT touch your credit rating.

Anyway, who says you will not win, it is after all the biggest scam in the UK today

You must reply within the 30 days of the letter.  Wait until day 27/28 and reply by email

1: You deny any debt 
2: You require a further 30 days as you are taking debt advice
3: You require a full explanation of the added £70 and their legal authority to add it.

You send now a SAR to the parking company requesting the info they hold on you. They will need proof of who you are and a copy of your V5 will suffice. No drivers licence or passport. They have 30 days to respond.

I assume you have read the NEWBIES thread and this one
DCBL letters ... forum group thread
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6237177/dcbl-letters-forum-group-thread#latest

Tell us more as to why you got a ticket

D_P_Dance

 but don’t really have £170 either!

They have added what appears to be an extra unlawful amount of £70 for debt collection.

This amounts to double recovery and Judges all over the country are dismissing these spurious additions. Indeed some judges have dismissed entire claims because of this. Read this and complain to Trading Standards and 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''.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/16qovzulab1szem/G4QZ465V Excel v Wilkinson.pdf?dl=0

However, VCS appealed this so it may not apply in all cases, read this

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ntksx9g7177ahyg/VCS v Percy v1 Amendments (2).pdf?dl=0Also read this

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6279348/witness-statements-2-transcripts-re-parking-firms-false-costs-recorder-cohen-qc-judgment-2021/p1

Also consider complaining to The SRA about the solicitor, if one is involved They are fully aware of the unlawful nature of most of thse additions yet persist in adding them..

https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/problems/

DisruptiveLad

Tell DCBL to shove their letters up their hole. They're a bunch of cowboys that don't like to be bullied. They got the wrong guy when they picked on me. I bullied them into giving up the ghost. They don't like it up 'em.

patient_dream

DisruptiveLad said:

Tell DCBL to shove their letters up their hole. They're a bunch of cowboys that don't like to be bullied. They got the wrong guy when they picked on me. I bullied them into giving up the ghost. They don't like it up 'em.

Sadly they are bully boys and they remind me of the "wide mouth frog"

Bully boys can always be beaten and DCBL are now well on course for mass complaints to the SRA 

I could maybe understand if they were chasing £ thousands but these are pathetic amounts ... £100 plus a fake £60/70 ?

How stupid to put their necks on the line with the courts and the SRA ?

BellaCassie17

That’s really helpful thank you everyone!

patient_dream 

Tell us more as to why you got a ticket 

I was 12 minutes over the alloted time in a FREE car park, I did complain to my MP at the time (per MSE advice) however he wasn’t all that interested.  Did try to contact the land owners however really really struggled finding out who they were and any contact info online

BellaCassie17

patient_dream said:

Typical bog standard DCBL letter before claim adding a fake £70

Do we assume this is another crazy UKPC claim ?

Nothing can touch your credit rating.   If it went to court and you lost, you would have about 14 days to pay and if you did not pay ONLY THEN is a CCJ issued.   
Dodgy parking companies, debt collectors including legals CANNOT touch your credit rating.

Anyway, who says you will not win, it is after all the biggest scam in the UK today

You must reply within the 30 days of the letter.  Wait until day 27/28 and reply by email

1: You deny any debt 
2: You require a further 30 days as you are taking debt advice
3: You require a full explanation of the added £70 and their legal authority to add it.

You send now a SAR to the parking company requesting the info they hold on you. They will need proof of who you are and a copy of your V5 will suffice. No drivers licence or passport. They have 30 days to respond.

I assume you have read the NEWBIES thread and this one
DCBL letters ... forum group thread

Tell us more as to why you got a ticket

DisruptiveLad said:

Tell DCBL to shove their letters up their hole. They're a bunch of cowboys that don't like to be bullied. They got the wrong guy when they picked on me. I bullied them into giving up the ghost. They don't like it up 'em.

D_P_Dance said:

 but don’t really have £170 either!

They have added what appears to be an extra unlawful amount of £70 for debt collection.

This amounts to double recovery and Judges all over the country are dismissing these spurious additions. Indeed some judges have dismissed entire claims because of this. Read this and complain to Trading Standards and 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''.

However, VCS appealed this so it may not apply in all cases, read this

read this

Also consider complaining to The SRA about the solicitor, if one is involved They are fully aware of the unlawful nature of most of thse additions yet persist in adding them..

Hiya,

I last night wrote a complaint to the land owner and also one of the retailers who I’ve spent a small fortune with, the retailer has told me they don’t get involved because they aren’t the land owners, but I can see from these forums that this is incorrect, what should my response now be to the retailer to get them to help me out? I can see from these forums that many people have had a lot of success with this retailer so I am surprised at this response (happy to name the retailer just unsure if that’s the right thing to do!)

I am about to make the SAR request from the parking company,

many thanks in advance!

Redx

The retailer is probably correct and not the landowner , few retailers actually own the land , most are tenants

They could have told you who the landowner is , or more likely who the managing agent is , so you can complain to them

You should find the managing agent first , as they are likely to have contracted the parking company !

So IMHO , accept what they told you and follow my advice , contact the managing agent

Yes , send a SAR to the DPO at the PPC

BellaCassie17

Redx said:

The retailer is probably correct and not the landowner , few retailers actually own the land , most are tenants

They could have told you who the landowner is , or more likely who the managing agent is , so you can complain to them

You should find the managing agent first , as they are likely to have contracted the parking company !

So IMHO , accept what they told you and follow my advice , contact the managing agent

Yes , send a SAR to the DPO at the PPC

Thank you very much I’ll do that now, I’m sorry I’m trying to find a template for an SAR request on here but there’s so much info I’ve yet to see one while scrolling (and still am) are you able to point me in the direction at all please?

Redx

Newbies FAQ sticky thread near the top of the forum in announcements , based on the legal beagles template , because a SAR is about Data protection or data rectification , not parking ( it's got nothing to do with the parking topic )

A Google search also provides good GDPR information too , including SAR requests

Le_Kirk

BellaCassie17 said:

Redx said:

The retailer is probably correct and not the landowner , few retailers actually own the land , most are tenants

They could have told you who the landowner is , or more likely who the managing agent is , so you can complain to them

You should find the managing agent first , as they are likely to have contracted the parking company !

So IMHO , accept what they told you and follow my advice , contact the managing agent

Yes , send a SAR to the DPO at the PPC

Thank you very much I’ll do that now, I’m sorry I’m trying to find a template for an SAR request on here but there’s so much info I’ve yet to see one while scrolling (and still am) are you able to point me in the direction at all please?

It is in the NEWBIE sticky here >>>> 12 January 2014 at 7:42PM