Letter of claim

JerzyB

Fruitcake said:

I didn't realise you had already done a 30 day hold instruction. Have you received another letter of/before claim since you told them you were seeking debt advice, or have you only received the one?

No, I've only received one, and then I gave them the driver's details. 

Fruitcake said:

What precisely has the driver received from DCBL. It should only be them asking him to confirm that he was the driver. He shouldn't have received a LoC unless a NTD was left on the vehicle at the material time of the alleged event.
I think all the driver needs to do is acknowledge that they believe they were the driver on the date of the alleged event in reply to the letter from DCBL, but it depends on exactly what they sent to the driver.

So far - unless he gets home and finds something on the doormat this evening - the driver hasn't received anything at all other than the first letter from DCBL that asked him if he was the driver on the night in question; no LoC, no reply form...nothing! This is why we were thinking of pre-emptively filling in his reply form today and hitting DCBL with a 30-day hold that'll take the case over the statute barred date. 

Fruitcake

In that case, all he needs to do is reply and admit that he was the driver on the relevant date. Make sure he includes any and all reference numbers given by DCBL.
If it will make you feel more comfortable you could get the driver to say he is seeking debt advice and therefore requires the case to be put on hold for 30 days as per court pre-action protocol.
Once DCBL have received that confirmation they should pass it on to their client, and UKPC should then issue a NTD to the driver.
He must send it first class from a Post Office counter and obtain the absolutely essential free proof of posting. As a precaution I would advise him to take photos of his reply and the envelope with DCBL's address.
It wouldn't hurt to email it to DCBL as well to make sure it gets there before they try to issue a LBC or claim

Like I said, they may play billy suggers and try to issue a letter of/before claim, but if they do then that should be robustly reported to the BPA because this will be the first the driver knows anything about the alleged event, and the driver should be given an NTD and should be given time to respond to it.

JerzyB

OK, cool - that's all he's done. The email that he sent them (above) had both DCBL's reference number and the PPC's PCN number in the subject line. 

Do you not think, then, that a pre-emptive strike with the reply form from the driver should be done? If it's sent via email before he receives either a NTD or LoC, surely that's them stuffed, or am I missing something? 

Fruitcake

I'm not sure to what forms you are referring. He only needs to send a letter.

I added more to my previous post after your previous reply, so I suggest you reread it. The driver must back up his email with a letter, sent from a post office counter as I suggest above. It is not unknown for PPCs to say they didn't receive an email, and it is difficult to prove whether they did or didn't
When it comes to items sent by post, the Interpretation Act and the Court Practice rules assume documents have arrived within a specific timescale. This means that something sent first class is presumed by law to have been received two working days after, which is why it is essential that the driver gets the proof of posting.

JerzyB

Fruitcake said:

I'm not sure to what forms you are referring. He only needs to send a letter.

I'm talking about the reply form that one receives with the NTD.

Fruitcake said:

I added more to my previous post after your previous reply, so I suggest you reread it. The driver must back up his email with a letter, sent from a post office counter as I suggest above. It is not unknown for PPCs to say they didn't receive an email, and it is difficult to prove whether they did or didn't.

The driver has received a standard automated email reply from DCBL, so they've definitely received his admission that he may have been the driver on the night in question.

Fruitcake said:

If it will make you feel more comfortable you could get the driver to say he is seeking debt advice and therefore requires the case to be put on hold for 30 days as per court pre-action protocol.
Once DCBL have received that confirmation they should pass it on to their client, and UKPC should then issue a NTD to the driver.

That's what we're thinking of doing, simply because if the driver's case is put on hold for 30 days from today, that takes the case to 18th December and thus over the statute date.

In the meantime, he'll print off and post his emails to DCBL (including a copy of their automated email response) today.

Fruitcake

That all sounds good. I would definitely back everything up with a letter from the driver because DCBL could just say that their system sent an auto response but when they checked, the email they received was corrupted or blank or didn't contain driver's details.
It's much better to use a system that is backed by legislation.

Coupon-mad

 have already had a 30 day hold put on the case before I gave them the driver's details. 

Can I check:

Has the keeper given the driver's details?

Your account suggests the DRIVER replied to a letter not addressed to them and gave their own details (which would be ignored as they are a third party).

The keeper (Defendant) has to give the name and address of the driver. Has the Defendant done that?

JerzyB

Coupon-mad said:

 have already had a 30 day hold put on the case before I gave them the driver's details. 

Can I check:

Has the keeper given the driver's details?

Your account suggests the DRIVER replied to a letter not addressed to them and gave their own details (which would be ignored as they are a third party).

The keeper (Defendant) has to give the name and address of the driver. Has the Defendant done that?

Yes, the keeper has provided the driver's details to DCBL.
DCBL have then written to the driver at his correspondence address.
The driver replied to their letter by email, advising that he may have been the driver on the night of the incident. 
DCBL have failed - so far, anyway - to send any further documentation to either the driver or the keeper.
The driver has now printed off a letter to DCBL to advise them that he has not received anything else from them. The letter contains the original email he sent to DCBL as well as their automated reply email. 

Fruitcake

I think you can do no more other than wait the clock out whist you see what UKPC/DCBL do.

JerzyB

Fruitcake said:

I think you can do no more other than wait the clock out whist you see what UKPC/DCBL do.

Yes, pretty much. 
The driver, however, is considering that if nothing arrives at his correspondence address tomorrow, he'll write a letter, and email and send it in the post to both DCBL and the PPC and request the case be put on hold for 30 days as per the PAP.
His thoughts are that if he hits them with that before they post anything to him, on 17th December he'll be able to contact them both again and tell them they're out of time as the case will be statute barred. 
What do you reckon; good or bad idea?