CCBC UKPC Ltd Help 17 January at 12:19PM in Parking tickets, fines & parking 29 replies 406 views

sparkeytec

Hi

I have received a CCBC from UKPC Ltd - issue date 29th Dec 2022

The acting solicitors are DCB Legal Ltd

It is in regards to 2 "Parking Charges" issued to my car at:

King Park, Kings Dock St, Liverpool, L1 8LE

On 15/02/2017 and 17/03/2017

Total amount being claimed for is £587.92 (amount claimed £487.92, court fee £50.00, legal rep costs £50.00)

The car park is one I used to use on a daily basis for work (for about 4 years) until June 2017.
The car park fee initially used to be cash in hand but moved to a payment meter.
To be honest, I don't really recall these tickets. It could easily have been a case that on a couple of mornings I may have forgotten to make the payment (in a rush etc...)
At the time I had my car registered at an old address I no longer lived in - forgot to update the DVLA as I was getting the tax reminders to my new address so just assumed I had changed these details as well - so didn't get any correspondence about this one until 2021 when I did change the address over. I received a couple of letters but just ignored them and didn't reply to any correspondence.

Following guidance in similar posts I have sent a Subject Access Request to UKPC to provide photo evidence, correspondence, the PDT machine record etc...
I received a quick reply with some photo details of my car and timestamp with a ticket attached to my car. One of the photos does show a parking ticket in the window but the ticket isn't placed correctly and doesn't show any information so the parking attendant would have difficulty reading it (I probably just thrown it in - again in a morning rush).
They also sent initial correspondence from 2017 but no copies of letters/correspondence since then
They haven't sent the PDT machine records

I have also emailed DCB Legal (difficult to find their email address) on 09/01/2023 at [email protected] and also to their query form on their website asking for 30 days hold but haven't heard anything since

I have submitted the AOS on 17/01/2023

So i'm guessing my next steps are to defend the claim but not sure on what defence as I reckon it is probably my mistake in the first place with being in a rush and missing payment twice in about 4 years of parking
Is there a time limit to these kind of claims?

Is this enough to make a claim:

- False Admin cost: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6108153/suggested-template-defence-to-adapt-for-all-parking-charge-cases-where-they-add-false-admin-costs#latest
- Abuse of process: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6185114/a-name-change-abuse-of-process-is-now-double-recovery/p1?new=1

I've had a look at google street view around the time of the issued tickets and the entry to the car park does clearly state it is pay and display:





Any help would be very much appreciated

Not_A_Hope

There is a time limit of 6 years for PPCs to bring a claim to court.

The abuse of process defence will only stop the fake add on £60/£70 for each PCN.

You could use a ‘fluttering ticket’ as a defence for the PCN where the parking attendant might not have been able to read it. Is it possible or even likely they may of used the old ‘angle of the camera’ trick to give the impression it could not be read and therefore earning the scammers £100.
If you used this car park and paid every day for 4 years a judge may think on the balance of probabilities you paid for this ticket and maybe the other one. You certainly don’t want to saying ‘it was your mistake’ especially when they have shown a photo of a ticket in the window.

Have you got photos of all the signs? They form the contract which they allege you broke

If you can put up a robust defence there are a lot of examples of UKPC / DCBL discontinuing before a court hearing. See @Umkomaas thread

Coupon-mad

To be honest, I don't really recall these tickets. 

Same as shedloads of cases already won or discontinued.

Just copy an unremarkable day defence (search the forum and ALWAYS change 'best match' to NEWEST.  Do not speculate that you may have been at fault.  Suggest in the defence that the Defendant always pays & display and on occasion the machine or app must have failed.

Easy enough - standard UKPC rubbish signs and meritless claim and you'll know from @Umkomaas' DCBLegal thread that they - DCBLegal/UKPC  - will discontinue later on, with no hearing needed, as long as you follow our advice.

Read a dozen DCBLegal threads.

You'll soon suss the pattern and how to get there.

patient_dream

JUST ANOTHER RUBBISH UKPC CASE

No doubt will end up here .....

DCB LEGAL RECORD OF PRIVATE PARKING COURT CLAIM DISCONTINUATIONS

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6377263/dcb-legal-record-of-private-parking-court-claim-discontinuations/p1

You may wonder why DCBL take on so many rubbish cases ???
If you get to find out, please let us know

KeithP

sparkeytec said:

I have also emailed DCB Legal (difficult to find their email address) on 09/01/2023 at [email protected] and also to their query form on their website asking for 30 days hold but haven't heard anything since

You won't get a 30 day hold - or any hold - once a Claim has been issued.

sparkeytec said:

I have received a CCBC from UKPC Ltd - issue date 29th Dec 2022

I have submitted the AOS on 17/01/2023

You left filing an Acknowledgment of Service to the last minute, didn't you?

With a Claim Issue Date of 29th December, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Tuesday 31st January 2023 to file your Defence.

That's two 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 at the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Don't miss the deadline 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'.

Mouse007

I’ve not been around here long enough to know if this is normal but there appear to be an extraordinarily large number of cases rushing to court just before the 6 year deadline. How many have we seen in the last few weeks?

I’m seriously under the impression that the rogue ppc’s are investing data to claim later. Did they some 5 years ago take lots of incriminating photos of innocent and correctly parked cars. Did they then obtain the RK’s DVLA details and do nothing but bank the information and wait? By waiting long enough to bring a claim are they hoping the RK’s would simply fall for their scam?

Here we have the OP speculating about the possibility of forgetting to buy a ticket a couple of times. Hello? I’d say that’s more unlikely than not. Your daily routine was “I used to use on a daily basis for work (for about 4 years)”. I bet you were on autopilot every morning like Groundhog Day. You don’t need to speculate about the possibility, deny the possibility, you parked and paid daily for 4 years. How can you be expected to remember anything about those 2 unremarkable days so long ago?

Coupon-mad

This old PCN barrel-scraping is conduct mainly led by DCBLegal.

What a bullying, horrendous company DCB appear to be by their treatment of consumers as 'opponents'.  

Good luck to Steve Clark.  Chalk & cheese.

sparkeytec

Not_A_Hope said:

If you used this car park and paid every day for 4 years a judge may think on the balance of probabilities you paid for this ticket and maybe the other one. You certainly don’t want to saying ‘it was your mistake’ especially when they have shown a photo of a ticket in the window.

Fair point - think I will add that as part of the defence

Not_A_Hope said:

Have you got photos of all the signs? They form the contract which they allege you broke

Not from the time - the only photos I can go by is the google streetview timeline which has pictures from around that time. One of which states 'See notices in car park for conditions' but I don't have any pictures from inside the car park. 
The only other picture I have is the one UKPC sent me following my SAR:



But the resolution isn't good enough to be able to read anything meaningful on it - also its a large car park and couldn't say if this sign was placed somewhere which was easily observed.

patient_dream said:

You may wonder why DCBL take on so many rubbish cases ???
If you get to find out, please let us know

I'm going to guess a lot like the debt collecting industry and buy old debts for pennies and any payment they get is just profit.

sparkeytec

KeithP said:

sparkeytec said:

I have also emailed DCB Legal (difficult to find their email address) on 09/01/2023 at [email protected] and also to their query form on their website asking for 30 days hold but haven't heard anything since

You won't get a 30 day hold - or any hold - once a Claim has been issued.

Thanks @KeithP - didn't realise, won't hold out for that then!

KeithP 

You left filing an Acknowledgment of Service to the last minute, didn't you?

I'm a infamous procastinator - nearly had a heart attack when I calculated the dates

sparkeytec

Thanks all for the feedback so far - gives me some confidence I might be able to get rid of this. Judging by the amount of posts about DCB sending out claim letters on the 29th Dec, seems they are on a fishing trip.

Will search the forum for the previously mentioned unremarkable day defence and tailor as necessary and post my progress - hopefully I can post something positive on @Umkomaas thread

Not_A_Hope

If that photo is the best they have got they are going to find it difficult to convince a judge you broke the terms and conditions. To form a contract the terms have to be clear and obvious.

You may find they produce more pictures of the signs when the respond to your defence points in their WS. They may produce stock photos of a sign on a desk not the actual signs as a customer would see them. Small signs, up a lamp post, hidden behind cars or bushes and no lighting.

Debt collectors are not allowed to buy or sell debt. But they do earn a fee from every successful hounding. Currently they add extra to the court claim which is not allowed but they get away with it.