UKPC/DCB Court Claim - Blue badge in residential car park on white cross lines -PHOTOS

Tommcp21

Hi all,

I got a parking ticket in Jun2019 outside of my rented flat at the time, my space had been taken by someone else so I parked on some "NO PARKING" white lines, with a blue badge (at the time did not realise a blue badge had no relevance in residential/private car parks!!)

I have been following the guidance after receiving letters from DCB legal and last week the court claim form appeared in the post. I already had done the SAR so have everything they should be looking at.

7 photos between 05:37:29 – 05:38:16 (47 seconds total incld both the car and van in the background having moved!)

Photo 1 [Timestamp: 26/06/2019 05:37:29] - Windshield

Photo 2 [Timestamp: 26/06/2019 05:37:33] – Front of car

Photo 3 [Timestamp: 26/06/2019 05:37:43] – Front of car + Van behind

Photo 4 [Timestamp: 26/06/2019 05:37:52] – Back of car

Photo 5 [Timestamp: 26/06/2019 05:37:55] – Back of car further out

Photo 6 [Timestamp: 26/06/2019 05:38:09] – Signage

Photo 7 [Timestamp: 26/06/2019 05:38:16] – “NO PARKING” lines, but car and van have gone + the ford focus that was originally in front of my car has also seemed to have changed

Do you think it is worth saying I believe these timestamps have been somewhat forged for photo 7 (attached) at the very least, does it bring to question the legitimacy of the rest?

I will also be using the equality act 2010 for reasonable adjustment in my defence, now that it is actually in court. Obviously this fell on deaf ears with (naive) appeals to UKPC/POPLA

Date of issue was the 29th Mar so I will do my AOS this week

Thanks in advance!

Coupon-mad

Nope, NEVER used words like forged or fraud in a small claim defence.

Just do what everyone else is doing in all the other UKPC/DCBLegal threads since February (at least two of which are right next to yours tonight) and adapt the defence by Johny86

KeithP

Tommcp21 said:

I have been following the guidance after receiving letters from DCB legal and last week the court claim form appeared in the post.
Date of issue was the 29th Mar so I will do my AOS this week.

With a Claim Issue Date of 29th March, you have until Monday 17th April 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 2nd May 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'.

Tommcp21

Coupon-mad said:

Nope, NEVER used words like forged or fraud in a small claim defence.

Just do what everyone else is doing in all the other UKPC/DCBLegal threads since February (at least two of which are right next to yours tonight) and adapt the defence by Johny86

Thanks Coupon-mad, will do - So not worth rewording/mentioning at all? seems a shame to not call them out on something that is clearly ‘wrong’! 

Umkomaas

Tommcp21 said:

Coupon-mad said:

Nope, NEVER used words like forged or fraud in a small claim defence.

Just do what everyone else is doing in all the other UKPC/DCBLegal threads since February (at least two of which are right next to yours tonight) and adapt the defence by Johny86

Thanks Coupon-mad, will do - So not worth rewording/mentioning at all? seems a shame to not call them out on something that is clearly ‘wrong’! 

But who do you think will do anything about it?  A small claims court isn't about investigating an accusation of fraud, especially at a hearing often taking just a few minutes to conduct. 

B789

33 seconds is certainly enough time for anyone to enter a vehicle and drive off. Whilst there have been PPCs evidenced to have altered timestamps in the past, the "now you see them - now you don't" photos are not evidence that would stand up in court.

Just set yourself a timer for 33 seconds and imagine an able-bodied person, getting into their car and driving off, then you will see why it is not really evidence of timestamp tampering.

Tommcp21

Yep fair points, it was more from the angle  that would be their evidence to use - that I could call out their chancing to start with! 

Anyway noted and won’t be mentioning it

will be doing AOS today and compiling the defence from there

thanks all 

Boat_to_Bolivia

Tommcp21 said:

Yep fair points, it was more from the angle  that would be their evidence to use - that I could call out their chancing to start with! 

Anyway noted and won’t be mentioning it

will be doing AOS today and compiling the defence from there

thanks all 

Just to clarify, you WON'T be submitting your defence on MCOL will you?

Tommcp21

Boat_to_Bolivia said:

Tommcp21 said:

Yep fair points, it was more from the angle  that would be their evidence to use - that I could call out their chancing to start with! 

Anyway noted and won’t be mentioning it

will be doing AOS today and compiling the defence from there

thanks all 

Just to clarify, you WON'T be submitting your defence on MCOL will you?

Oops, no that is not what I meant. AOS on there only 

Tommcp21

Hi all, changed paragraphs 2 and 3 below - any feedback appreciated ! 
(and then will include paragraphs 4 onwards when I email off the defence)


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The facts as known to the Defendant:

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle.

 

3.  The defendant came home late to find their own resident’s space had been taken so had to find somewhere else to park. The other disabled bays in the area also were occupied (by drivers without blue badges) so the claimant had to park somewhere close enough to walk to the flat.
The defendant parked in a large open space, easily and purposely not blocking any other cars nor flat entrances, and put their blue badge clearly on display.

As there was nowhere else to park that would not require a 5minute walk, the defendant parked here, and considered it to be a fair and reasonable adjustment under the Equality Act 2010, as someone with proof of protected characteristics. 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is this too short - should I mention any more around the equality act? Ive been searching the forums for a while but struggled to find similar examples

Also the nearest sign is on a lamppost, so was also dark at the time of parking -- not sure if it is a different arguement for being a resident/residents car park

Thanks

B789

That looks good. As it is a UKPC/DCB Legal bottom-dwelling duo, make sure you use the template with the extra paragraphs to counter the atrocious PoC in their claim, an example of which is shown here:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/66hosld75llha3j/2023_defence.pdf?dl=0