Letter of Claim - Dcb Legal in behalf of VcS

ab2000

Stop emailing them. They won't stop unless instructed to by the PPC. 

Your time would be better spent preparing your defence for when the claim forms arrive followed by a potential day in court.

Have you read and understood the Newbies thread?  

panda90

ab2000 said:

Stop emailing them. They won't stop unless instructed to by the PPC. 

Your time would be better spent preparing your defence for when the claim forms arrive followed by a potential day in court.

Have you read and understood the Newbies thread?  

Yes I did! Thanks

patient_dream

As said, it is pointless to keep emailing DCBL.  Accept that email as the last. 

So you will not be paying and you will receive a court claim with the fake £60 added plus interest @ 8%. Of course a further £85 is added for the court fee and legel fee (court max)

They base the interest on an old outdated court reference and the vast majority of judges will dismiss this because nobody gets 8% nowadays

Regarding the fake £60 ... they will either call it debt recovery or their current favourite being "damages"

Both are rubbish.  The £60 debt recovery as you know was a dreamworld fabrication by the BPA in their code of practice which has no legal authority and was only designed to scam the motorist. Most judges know this by now

The damages, who are they claiming this for ? It is clear from your pictures that VCS do not own the land so it's not them, it also cannot be for DCBL as they are only the acting legal 
Something DCBL have actually failed to explain and if it does go to court, the judge may care to ask them especially as someone at DCBL will have to sign a statement of truth ? 

Both can be deemed as an attempt of double recovery which is against the rules of the court.  We no longer say abuse of process, which it still is, but more so "double recovery"

It is also against the Supreme Court ruling in the ParkingEye case 

The Semark case brought by BWLegal actually ended up as a damp squib for them. Judges around the country know this is abuse of process but will apply their own interpretation and still strike out cases.

The red "THIS IS NOT A PARKING TICKET" can only be seen as just that and if a judge received the same, he/she would assume the same.
It is in plain English and not in a language that people do not understand

DCBL have more hoops to jump through than you and they would be very foolish to continue. If they do bring a claim they will play the game up to the last minute.  They will want to avoid a court spanking where you can claim your costs

Press on, right now you have a lot in your favour, much more than DCBL

What part of the country are you in ?

panda90

patient_dream said:

As said, it is pointless to keep emailing DCBL.  Accept that email as the last. 

So you will not be paying and you will receive a court claim with the fake £60 added plus interest @ 8%. Of course a further £85 is added for the court fee and legel fee (court max)

They base the interest on an old outdated court reference and the vast majority of judges will dismiss this because nobody gets 8% nowadays

Regarding the fake £60 ... they will either call it debt recovery or their current favourite being "damages"

Both are rubbish.  The £60 debt recovery as you know was a dreamworld fabrication by the BPA in their code of practice which has no legal authority and was only designed to scam the motorist. Most judges know this by now

The damages, who are they claiming this for ? It is clear from your pictures that VCS do not own the land so it's not them, it also cannot be for DCBL as they are only the acting legal 
Something DCBL have actually failed to explain and if it does go to court, the judge may care to ask them especially as someone at DCBL will have to sign a statement of truth ? 

Both can be deemed as an attempt of double recovery which is against the rules of the court.  We no longer say abuse of process, which it still is, but more so "double recovery"

It is also against the Supreme Court ruling in the ParkingEye case 

The Semark case brought by BWLegal actually ended up as a damp squib for them. Judges around the country know this is abuse of process but will apply their own interpretation and still strike out cases.

The red "THIS IS NOT A PARKING TICKET" can only be seen as just that and if a judge received the same, he/she would assume the same.
It is in plain English and not in a language that people do not understand

DCBL have more hoops to jump through than you and they would be very foolish to continue. If they do bring a claim they will play the game up to the last minute.  They will want to avoid a court spanking where you can claim your costs

Press on, right now you have a lot in your favour, much more than DCBL

What part of the country are you in ?

I will stop any contacts with them from now - i was only hoping to get another 30 days to delay them more !
 I live in Manchester around city centre!
Thanks for the reply 🙏

Umkomaas

I live in Manchester around city centre!

Manchester County Court judges have not been particularly sympathetic towards private parking company claims in the past.  I would imagine that VCS are looking less forward to meeting one of them than you are!

Coupon-mad

Search the forum for Burzynski and find the case transcript you will need (the case is about the red 'this is not a parking charge' packet in fact being a PCN).  Only really helps the Defendant if they weren't driving.

panda90

Coupon-mad said:

Search the forum for Burzynski and find the case transcript you will need (the case is about the red 'this is not a parking charge' packet in fact being a PCN).  Only really helps the Defendant if they weren't driving.

Will do ! I think i found it ! 

Thank you

KeithP

You must immediately delete that image.

There is enough information there for anyone to submit a Defence on your behalf.

The Claim Number, MCOL password, vehicle reg, PCN numbers are all clearly visible.

And with a little bit of effort, I can tell you your full name and address.

Do you have no privacy concerns?

panda90

KeithP said:

You must immediately delete that image.

There is enough information there for anyone to submit a Defence on your behalf.

The Claim Number, MCOL password, vehicle reg, PCN numbers are all clearly visible.

And with a little bit of effort, I can tell you your full name and address.

Do you have no privacy concerns?

I have done it. Thanks

KeithP

With a Claim Issue Date of 29th September, you have until Tuesday 18th October to file an Acknowledgment of Service but there is nothing to be gained by delaying it. 

To file an Acknowledgment of Service, follow the guidance in the Dropbox file linked from the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Tuesday 1st November 2022 to file your Defence.

That's four weeks away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence, but please don't leave it to the last minute.

To create a Defence, and then file a Defence by email, look again at the second post on the NEWBIES thread - immediately following where you found the Acknowledgment of Service instructions.

Don't miss the deadline for filing an Acknowledgment of Service, nor that for filing a Defence.

Do not try and file a Defence via the MoneyClaimOnline website. Once an Acknowledgment of Service has been filed, the MCOL website should be treated as 'read only'.