DCB LEGAL RECORD OF PRIVATE PARKING COURT CLAIM DISCONTINUATIONS

ChillyDragon51

Thrilled to be Number 501.......

patient_dream

Supporting money scammers in the parking industry has given DCBL  68% negative reviews on Trustpilot
HOW SMART IS THAT ?

Jenni_D

Position or Office Held: Head of Bulk Litigation. Says it all, really. 🙄

Blindside6

Well done.

I've dealt with Ms Ensall. Not very bright.

As evidenced by the defective DN. She has signed herself as 'Claimant' rather than 'Claimant's Solicitor'.

But the court staff unlikely to spot that error, so best let that particular sleeping dog lie!

DE_612183

She has also "signed" the letter a year and a half before it was sent.

ChillyDragon51

patient_dream said:

Supporting money scammers in the parking industry has given DCBL  68% negative reviews on Trustpilot
HOW SMART IS THAT ?

WOW really? 

ChillyDragon51

Blindside6 said:

Well done.

I've dealt with Ms Ensall. Not very bright.

As evidenced by the defective DN. She has signed herself as 'Claimant' rather than 'Claimant's Solicitor'.

But the court staff unlikely to spot that error, so best let that particular sleeping dog lie!

Thanks @Blindside6

Well spotted on the 'Claimant'!!  Didn't even notice that, or the date error @DE_612183 spotted either! #hawkeyes!!!

I had correspondence back many years ago with ELMS Legal.  Honestly the communication was hysterical.  At one point I actually responded to the clerk that the grammar and punctuation in their e-mail made it almost impossible to decipher....   

Umkomaas

@ChillyDragon51 coolly burns off UKPC and DCB Legal, and racks up discontinuation #

501

Bullseye and a nine-dart finish! 🎯 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6550435/parking-charge-assumed-to-be-the-driver-claim-form-received/p5

BikingBud

I wasn't sure if this fits here or elsewhere but is it time that after over 500 discontinuations that DCB Legal were held to account for their behaviour?

If you are concerned about your solicitor's behaviour

The SRA can help you, or take action, when solicitors:

• tell lies

• steal from you

• shut down without telling you

• break our rules

• otherwise fail to meet required standards.

 Obviously they are not the solicitors of the posters on here but there appears to be 2 grounds where their behaviour fall below the required standards. Moreover, they are obliged to comply with:

The Principles
There are seven Principles that all people and law firms we regulate must meet. This means that they must act:

1. in a way that upholds the constitutional principle of the rule of law, and the proper administration of justice
2. in a way that upholds public trust and confidence in the solicitors' profession and in legal services provided by authorised persons
3. with independence
4. with honesty
5. with integrity
6. in a way that encourages equality, diversity and inclusion
7. in the best interests of each client.

As this ever growing list of discontinuations demonstrates they are some way adrift on 5 of those 7 principles, how do they continue to get away with it?

I also find it disconcerting that CNBC have a grouping named "super user", this is not like negotiating discount because you are buying baked beans but is does also demonstrate that if DCBL are submitting over 100,000 claims per year then the 250 discontinuation per year is not even background noise.

patient_dream

"DCBL are submitting over 100,000 claims per year then the 250 discontinuation per year is not even background noise."

100,000 a year from one company whould shut down the courts. how many actually end up in court ?
Many many people will just pay up before court.
 which of course is what DCBL want 
In reality I doubt DCBL  see this as background noise 
The question is just how many of the 100K see the daulight of court, how many times DCBL get spanked
Any old fool can robo claim and it would be interesting to learn how many of the so called 100K succeed