DCB Legal - Letter of Claim

Stokielad

Afternoon, apologies I've been working abroad for the last 3 weeks and only got back last Friday. After catching up things at home I have seen that DCB Legal sent the below email on the 24th May in response to my email. which I need to respond to by Thursday 22nd June I believe. 

I've also emailed the occupants of the building where I was parked over the weekend who confirmed its an ANPR system whereby you input your number plate on entering the building, which I obviously didn't do as I didn't leave my vehicle. They initially said they were unable to assist but have since responded stating the following "please send me your vehicle registration details to see if there is any special dispensation that can be allowed for this case". So will see what response i get to this. 


We write in response to your e-mail dated 9th May 2023.

We note from your response that you do not appreciate our need to pursue any alleged dets owed to UKPC. DCB Legal have now been instructed as all previous attempts from UKPC to resolve this issue have been unsuccessful.

Our client utilises Automatic Number Plate Recognition (“ANPR”) technology on the land where the parking charge notice was issued in order to manage the parking. This means that cameras capable of accurately recognising the vehicle registration number of a vehicle are constantly monitoring the entrance and exit to the land.  A photograph is taken of each vehicle as it enters and exits the land. Any vehicle found to have breached the terms of parking will be issued with a parking charge notice via the post.  As your vehicle was not registered to be on the land, you were in breach of the terms and conditions outlined and so the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) was issued correctly.

The Notice to Keeper was issued to you on 15th September 2022. You were afforded the opportunity to; appeal the parking charge, transfer liability to the driver (if it was not you) or make payment. Neither a successful appeal, nor an adequate nomination were received, yet payment remains outstanding.  

The Reminder Notice was issued to you on 15th October 2022. This notice reiterated that payment was outstanding and confirmed that legal action may be taken, and additional costs incurred if the parking charge was not paid. As a result, you remail fully liable for the outstanding balance of £170.00

You have 30 days from the date of this letter to pay the outstanding balance of £170.00. Failure to do so will result in a claim being issued against you without further notice.

Payment can be made via bank transfer to our designated client account: - 

Account Name: DCB Legal Ltd Client Account 

Sort Code: 20-24-09 

Account Number: 60964441 

You must quote the correct case reference (beginning ‘1’) when making payment. If you do not, we may be unable to correctly allocate the payment. If further action is taken by us as a result of an incorrect reference being quoted, you will be liable for any further fees or costs incurred. 

Alternatively, you can contact DCB Legal Ltd on 0203 434 0437 to make payment over the telephone or online at https://dcblegal.co.uk/response/pay-online/  

Coupon-mad

Reply and tell them that a complaint has been made to xxxxxxxx (landowner) who do not support the charge and are contacting UKPC to cancel it because no patron is intended to be marginalised or penalised by the opaque system that UKPC set up, which many genuine users found failed them.

Also tell them you are seeking debt advice so the case must be put on hold.

And tell them you know they will discontinue the template claim when they get to witness statement stage, so they may as well save the court fee right now and wind their necks in because this one will not be monetised.


YES - I AM SERIOUS - USE THAT LANGUAGE.

Stokielad

B789 said:

I would be happy to hazard a guess that the PCN is not PoFA compliant, even though they state it is. Can you post a copy of the PCN (both sides) to see the actual wording they have used?

I believe that the example PoFA wording used in a research article I'm putting together was from a UKPC PCN. I reproduce it here for clarification but it is not quite finished:

Is the PCN PoFA 2012 compliant?

Here is a sample of text that a private parking company (PPC) has put in their Notice to Keeper (NtK). The NtK was a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) issued by post to the registered keeper (RK) with no Notice to Driver (NtD) PCN attached to the windscreen by a parking attendant. This type of PCN/NtK is issued when the vehicle's "time on site" has been recorded automatically by Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras. However, does this bit of text actually make the PCN PoFA compliant so that they can pursue the RK instead of the driver?

"If, after a period of 28 days (beginning on the day after this Parking Charge is given), the amount requested in this Parking Charge has not been paid in full (or we have not been informed of the driver's name and current address), you, the registered keeper, will, subject to the conditions of, and under the terms of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, be liable to pay the unpaid Parking Charge. If no payment or representation is received within 28 days the outstanding debt will be forwarded to a debt recovery agency, at which point additional charges will apply in accordance with the terms and conditions of parking."

The excerpt above seems to contain some of the key elements required by PoFA 2012, such as:

1. Referring to the registered keeper: The text mentions "you, the registered keeper," which indicates that it is addressing the person responsible for the vehicle.

2. Liability of the registered keeper: The statement states that if the Parking Charge remains unpaid or the driver's name and current address are not provided within 28 days, the registered keeper will be liable to pay the outstanding charge. This is in line with the provisions of Schedule 4 of PoFA 2012.

3. Debt recovery agency and additional charges: The text mentions that if no payment or representation is received within 28 days, the outstanding debt will be forwarded to a debt recovery agency, and additional charges will apply as per the parking terms and conditions of parking.

While these elements appear to align with the general requirements of PoFA 2012, overall compliance with the act depends on other specific requirements and details outlined in the legislation.

Under PoFA 2012, the ability to add charges to the original charge sum is outlined in Schedule 4 of the Act. According to Schedule 4, paragraph 4(5), it states:

"The maximum sum which may be recovered from the keeper by virtue of the right conferred by this paragraph is the amount specified in the notice to keeper under paragraph 9(2)(f) or (4) (including any unpaid charges to which that paragraph applies) less any payments towards the unpaid charges."

This means that the maximum amount that can be recovered from the RK is the amount specified in the NtK, which includes any unpaid charges, minus any payments made toward those charges. It is important to note that the specific wording and requirements may vary depending on the circumstances and the content of the NtK such as whether the original PCN was issued as a NtD attached to the vehicle or is an initial postal PCN/NtK or a PCN/Notice to Hirer (NtH) of a leased vehicle. You need to understand your rights and obligations in accordance with PoFA 2012 and any applicable regulations.

So, according to PoFA 2012, an NtK must specify the amount of the parking charge. If the NtK only states the original £100 charge and does not provide any specific details about "additional charges" that may apply, the threat of additional charges is not compliant with the requirements of PoFA 2012.

PoFA 2012 sets out specific guidelines and conditions for the recovery of unpaid parking charges from the RK. These guidelines include transparency and clarity in the NtK, ensuring that the keeper or driver is aware of the exact amount they are liable to pay.

If a parking company intends to add additional charges, they should clearly state this in the NtK, specifying the circumstances under which these charges may be applied and providing a reasonable estimate of the potential additional charges. Vague statements such as "additional charges will apply" without further explanation are not compliant with the requirements of PoFA 2012.

Also, the NtK should specify the relevant paragraph under Schedule 4 of PoFA 2012 that applies to the specific circumstances of the notice. In the example above, where a postal NtK was issued and no NtD was attached to the vehicle, the NtK should mention that PoFA 2012, Schedule 4, paragraph 9(2) applies. This ensures that the recipient of the NtK is aware of the specific legal provisions that govern their liability and the procedures to be followed.

The purpose of including the specific paragraph reference is to provide clarity and transparency regarding the legal basis for the parking charge and the rights and obligations of the registered keeper. If the NtK does not clearly state the specific paragraph under Schedule 4 that applies to the notice, it does not satisfy the requirements of PoFA 2012.

In conclusion, the original PoFA 2012 paragraph in the example NtK, is not PoFA 2012 compliant even though it claims to be so.

See below copied of the letters received from UKPC, hopefully this is what your looking for.  

Coupon-mad

Something of a pig's ear of a NTK.  On the one hand it gets the 28 day keeper liability warning right, then in bold it states a load of non-POFA imaginary tosh about 42 days!

But this isn't something to hang your hat on anyway.  Forget it.

Stokielad

Afternoon, had an email from the building users confirming that they have been able to get the PCN overturned and the case is now closed. 

Thanks for all your input and advice! 

Umkomaas

Nice one. Send a copy to DCB Legal, then tell them to go swivel!

Not_A_Hope

Well done @Stokielad. Much easier getting it cancelled that way than dealing with the muppets trying to scam you.

Coupon-mad

Coupon-mad said:

Reply and tell them that a complaint has been made to xxxxxxxx (landowner) who do not support the charge and are contacting UKPC to cancel it because no patron is intended to be marginalised or penalised by the opaque system that UKPC set up, which many genuine users found failed them.

Also tell them you are seeking debt advice so the case must be put on hold.

And tell them you know they will discontinue the template claim when they get to witness statement stage, so they may as well save the court fee right now and wind their necks in because this one will not be monetised.


YES - I AM SERIOUS - USE THAT LANGUAGE.

Do the above and attach a copy of proof that it is cancelled and tell DCB to crawl back under their stone.

And please come back (first) in August to join us in changing the law.

This isn't a petition or similar 'pie in the sky' stuff.

It is nearly there.  I am heavily involved.

The law is ready to go in 2024 to stop the greediest excesses in parking charges and fake 'fees'.

Read and bookmark the sticky thread by MSE_JC and you'll see fro the 2022 replies what I mean.  Some PPCs (with more money than consumer fairness genes) legally blocked the new statutory Code of Practice in 2022.

...and we can now finally push it over the line in August when the DLUHC publish the final Public Consultation.

We need you!

...and your driving relatives!