UKPC - DCB Legal Ltd - County Court Defence 2023

lady25

Hi All, just wanted to clarify that all info is correct as of 2023.

 

Contravention: Vehicle was parked in a disabled person’s space without displaying a valid disabled person’s badge. – That’s what was sent to the registered keeper in 2018.

Letters were received from UKPC, DRP, Zenith collections & DCBL. All picture evidence has been downloaded and kept.

All were ignored and now have subsequently received County Court Claims Form at the beginning of January 2023.

AOS will be completed by the end of this week.

Please could someone confirm if my defence statement is up to date and adequate.  Thank you in advance.

 

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question, but liability is denied. 

3. It is denied that the Defendant was the driver.

4. The signs in the car park were unlit and it was dark at the time of the alleged contravention. There was no agreed contract.

5. All permits were displayed in the vehicle at the time of the alleged contravention.

KeithP

What is the Issue Date on your County Court Claim Form?

Did the driver, or any of his/her passengers, have a blue badge?

Coupon-mad

"It is denied that the Defendant was the driver."

How so (how are you sure)?  You should say how you know it wasn't you, but without naming the driver.

If it was you, remove the above (never lie).

Which PPC?

Which roboclaim solicitor?

What is the issue date of the claim?

When does MCOL show you did the AOS?

lady25

"It is denied that the Defendant was the driver." - The vehicle was being driven by another family member not the registered keeper.
The family member that was driving has stated that there was a valid blue badge displayed . However, they are no longer in touch with the passenger that used the blue badge. Should we remove that point as we don't have the evidence to prove it?

We have the pictures that were taken of the alleged contravention and they did not take the badge. There pictures are mostly of darkness.

PPC - UK Parking Control Limited
Solicitor - DCB Legal Ltd
Issue Date: 17/01/2023
MCOL for AOS - not done yet, will be done this week.

Thanks for your help.

lady25

Particulars of Claim
1. The Defendant(D) is indebted to the Claimant (C) for a Parking Charge(s) issued to vehicle xxxxxxxx at Beckon Triangle Retail Park, 5 Claps Gate Lane, London, E6 6LG
2. The PC details are xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

3. The PCN(s) was issued on private land owned or managed by C. The vehicle was parked in breach of the Terms on Cs signs the (Contract), thus incurring the PCN(s).
4. The driver agreed to pay within 28 days but did not. D is liable as the driver or keeper.

Despite requests, the PCN(s) is outstanding.

The Contract entitles C to damages.

AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS

1. £160 being the total of the PCN(s) and damages. 2. Interest at a rate of 8% per annum pursuant to s.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 from the date hereof at a daily rate of £0.02 until judgment or sooner payment. 3.

Costs and court fees

KeithP

lady25 said:

Issue Date: 17/01/2023
MCOL for AOS - not done yet, will be done this week.

With a Claim Issue Date of 17th January, you have until Monday 6th February 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 Monday 20th February 2023 to file your Defence.

That's over three 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 guidance.

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'.

Coupon-mad

lady25 said:

"It is denied that the Defendant was the driver." -

The vehicle was being driven by another family member not the registered keeper.
The family member that was driving has stated that there was a valid blue badge displayed . However, they are no longer in touch with the passenger that used the blue badge.
Should we remove that point as we don't have the evidence to prove it?

No, it is their case to prove not yours, so you should add the above extra information (my bold) because it is within your knowledge.

I suggest the driver (later on) also does their own truthful witness statement (WS) when you file & serve yours.

WS stage that is months off but just to give you a heads up. I think a Judge will want to hear that from the driver.  However, reassure the driver that this is unlikely to proceed to a hearing because DCBL / UKPC cases defended well, are almost invariably discontinued (i.e. they give up before the hearing). 

Put down '2 witnesses' on your DQ form when that arrives in Feb/March.

lady25

AOS completed.

Defence outlined below:

1.       It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question, but liability is denied. 

2.       It is denied that the Defendant was the driver. The vehicle was being driven by another family member not the registered keeper.

3.       The signs in the car park were unlit and it was very dark at the time of the alleged contravention. Therefore, there was no agreed contract.

4.       A valid blue badge was displayed in the vehicle at the time of the alleged contravention. The family member that was driving the vehicle has confirmed there was a valid blue badge displayed. However, they are no longer in touch with the passenger that used the blue badge.

Will this be enough for the defence alongside the template?

Coupon-mad

Remove this:

"However, they are no longer in touch with the passenger that used the blue badge."

Le_Kirk

Is that the standard defence template?  If so, there is a chunk missing from paragraph #1.  If you are defending as keeper not driver, you seem to know an awful lot about the car park, signs and blue badge.  Better to say something like "after receipt of the PCN, the keeper carried out research and determined that............"

lady25

Thanks, I've made changes to make it clearer.