DCB LEGAL LTD LOC, email and next steps

oceanseleven

Hello,

This is my first post. For background I have been reading and following the advice in others posts and believe I should now start my own for personalised advise - with thanks in advance. 

The PCN was issued in a retail park, where the vehicle was parked in between a disabled bay and a regular parking bay, but the space between 2 parking bays was apparently not a parking space. I did complain to the retail park with no luck and have continued to receive letters as I did not appeal within the time. 

The latest correspondence was a letter of claim from DCB LEGAL ltd. 



Actions taken so far:
complaint to retail store who replied and saying they have looked into it and "I advise you to liaise with parking management due to this issue is beyond our authorization" 
complaint to local MP, who has sent a holding response to acknowledge the complaint and will reply soon
Request to UKPC for SAR - this has been received
Email to DCB LEGAL to say: (a) I am seeking debt advice but I deny any debt and the case must be put 'on hold' for not less than 30 days under the PAP for debt claims 2017.
(b) I have sent your client a SAR


DCB have replied to my email asking for further info:

For data protection please provide the following:

•           Your full name

•           Your first line of address

•           Your postcode

 Please note, failure to respond to this email with the required information may result in the matter progressing further.

I assume I am ok to respond to DCB with all of the info requested as I did not include address in the initial email, but their reference number was there. I just wanted to be sure before I reply.

Is there anything else that I may have missed in the posts or should be doing at this stage?

Appreciate your advice on this and anything in terms of the next stage.

Many thanks 

KeithP

oceanseleven said:

DCB have replied to my email asking for further info:

For data protection please provide the following:

•           Your full name

•           Your first line of address

•           Your postcode

I assume I am ok to respond to DCB with all of the info requested...

Hello and welcome.
Yes, just send them what they are asking for.

oceanseleven

Many thanks for the reply KeithP - I have provided the info DCBL requested. 
I have also just received a response from the MPs office, they have read from the LOC that I should appeal using the reply form and financial statement option, but I know from the Newbies thread that I should not use the reply forms. 

They say the MP "should be happy to write to DCB in your support. I should make it clear from the outset that he is not in a position of formal authority over any private company, and unlike public bodies they are not even obliged to respond to him."

I will reply asking him to go ahead and write to them in my support and clarify the 'appeal form' misunderstanding. 

Thanks for all the really useful advise in these forum spaces. I will update on this thread as to DCB's next correspondence. 

Coupon-mad

Tell him in fact, as an AOS member of the parking industry even these agents ARE obliged to respond to MPs, as per the new DLUHC Code of Practice coming in (once the Judicial Review crap that temporarily stalled it, is overcome).

Not_A_Hope

Have have you seen the thread by @Umkomaas of discontinuations by UKPC / DCBL? It is worth a read.  

Just in case you are the unlucky one that actually has to go to a court hearing do their photos of the ‘non-parking bay’ support their claim or perhaps useful in your defence. Do you need to take your own photos of this trap?

oceanseleven

Not_A_Hope said:

Have have you seen the thread by @Umkomaas of discontinuations by UKPC / DCBL? It is worth a read.  

Just in case you are the unlucky one that actually has to go to a court hearing do their photos of the ‘non-parking bay’ support their claim or perhaps useful in your defence. Do you need to take your own photos of this trap?

Thank you for sharing, I had not seen this and useful to know. I'll put it here so i can easily find it again should it come to this. 

Oh I really hope I'm not so unlucky, looking at their photos I see a car parked in between 2 cars, in front of a store with yellow lines on one side (the disabled bay) - nothing in the 'space' itself such as the criss-cross type yellow lines next to the disabled bay to display no parking there. Therefore, I would hope they would be useful in support of a defence. I have taken a google images sceenshot of the trap myself too. 

oceanseleven

Hello,

I have been told that my MP wrote to DCBL but I've heard nothing further and I have since received the claim form. I have followed the steps advised and acknowledged service of claim, giving myself some more time (timeline outlines below). 
I would be grateful if you could please have a look at this draft defence FOR PARA 2 & 3 and advise if I need more detail or perhaps to add another case citation?

Many thanks in advance.

ISSUE DATE: 7 JULY

DATE OF SERVICE (5 DAYS AFTER ISSUE DATE): 12 JULY

DEADLINE TO REPLY TO CLAIM: 26 JULY

DATE acknowledgment of service FILED: 14 JULY

DEADLINE TO CLAIM: 9 AUGUST

DEFENCE:
 

The facts as known to the Defendant:

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

It is admitted that on [date] the Defendant's vehicle was parked at [location]

Authority to Park and Primacy of Contract
It is denied that the Defendant was in breach of any parking conditions or was not permitted to park in circumstances where an express permission to park had been granted to the Defendant permitting the above mentioned vehicle to be parked by the current occupier and leaseholder of [address], whose tenancy agreement permits the parking of vehicle(s) on land. The Defendant avers that there was an absolute entitlement to park deriving from the terms of the lease, which cannot be fettered by any alleged parking terms.

The lease terms shown on the sign are blurry at best. This is evidenced in the photo taken by the UKPC employee who preys on people spending money in their local stores.  

The Defendant avers that the operator’s signs cannot retrospectively and unilaterally conceal pitfalls, traps, hidden terms or unfair/unexpected obligations. The Defendant will rely upon the judgments in The ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015]. The Court will be referred to further similar fact cases in the event that this matter proceeds to trial.

3.  Misleading signage and markings

 It is denied that a contract was agreed. There was a lack of clear/conspicuous signage in the car park, which the Defendant will evidence.  The Claimant is put to strict proof to the contrary.  The vehicle was parked for the purposes of shopping only. The vehicle was parked in between 2 parked cars with yellow bay markings from the disabled bay immediately besides the ‘space’, this also is evidenced in the claimants photos. The Defendant also states that no surface markings were on the ground to suggest 'no parking' if this is the allegation, which is incoherent from the particulars. To receive an exorbitant fee for the vehicle allegedly “Not parked correctly within the markings of the bay or space” is absolutely and undoubtedly a parking trap!

KeithP

You are right with your Defence filing deadline but there might be something useful here...

With a Claim Issue Date of 7th July, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Wednesday 9th August 2023 to file your Defence.

That's a little over a week 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'.

oceanseleven

ThankKeithP said:

You are right with your Defence filing deadline but there might be something useful here...

With a Claim Issue Date of 7th July, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Wednesday 9th August 2023 to file your Defence.

That's a little over a week 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'.

Thanks for affirming this Keith, that's reassuring to know! I'm certainly planning to lock down the defence and file ahead of the 9th. 

Paragraph's 2 and 3 in my post above are part of my defence and I will use the rest of the template as advised. Are you able to comment on the 2 paragraphs above regarding suitability for my defence?

Many thanks

Not_A_Hope

Authority to Park and Primacy of Contract
It is denied that the Defendant was in breach of any parking conditions or was not permitted to park in circumstances where an express permission to park had been granted to the Defendant permitting the above mentioned vehicle to be parked by the current occupier and leaseholder of [address], whose tenancy agreement permits the parking of vehicle(s) on land. The Defendant avers that there was an absolute entitlement to park deriving from the terms of the lease, which cannot be fettered by any alleged parking terms. 

The lease terms shown on the sign are blurry at best. This is evidenced in the photo taken by the UKPC employee who preys on people spending money in their local stores.

I am not sure why this would be in your Defence statement as Primacy of Contract is used normally in reference to a motorist who has a residential lease and a right to a parking space which would supercede any terms and conditions a parking company might put on a sign that they might argue forms a contract. Not relevant for parking at a retail store

patient_dream

The clue for you is the sign.  This is typical rubbish from UKPC ...... UNREADABLE

DCBL are famous for taking on UKPC rubbish and DCBL are also famous for their multiple discontinuations

Play the game with them, they love it, we love it