Civil Enforcement PCN advice please

Le_Kirk

Feyla said:

Hi again, I have received an email with the amended date the 24th of September at 10:30. So will I receive another letter confirming once they pay the fee or?

Also I've gone over the newbies thread again, so I think I should submit evidence and a WS, and see if they discontinue the case or not. It seems to be very common for DCB legal to discontinue so that's a bit reassuring. I'm just not sure which evidence in the examples are relevant to my case, I don't have photos of the signage or anything, as the car park is quite far away from where I live, and also this was so long ago. I do not even know the payment method of the car park, if it was pay & display or something else. I don't have evidence of paying. The only thing is my mother was also in the car with me and can provide a statement, will her and my own WS be enough? 

To summarise;

- I did park on the day and for the time period that they say, and as far as I remember I did pay there's no way I would park for 12 hours and not pay, the only explanation is if the payment didn't work for whatever reason

- The evidence they have is a report of payments made, which looks to be manufactured, which doesn't show my number plate. They also have a photo of my car entering and leaving the car park, the later with an ineligible illegible number plate.

I could use some help as I'm not sure which evidence to submit

On you amended notice of allocation is there a date by which both parties have to submit their witness statement and evidence?  Or maybe it is just "not less than fourteen days before the hearing date".  Don't miss that date.  You won't receive any other letter confirming payment of fee, you could check with the local court after the date has passed.  Any passenger in the car can provide a witness statement supporting what you wrote in your defence.

Feyla

Le_Kirk said:

Feyla said:

Hi again, I have received an email with the amended date the 24th of September at 10:30. So will I receive another letter confirming once they pay the fee or?

Also I've gone over the newbies thread again, so I think I should submit evidence and a WS, and see if they discontinue the case or not. It seems to be very common for DCB legal to discontinue so that's a bit reassuring. I'm just not sure which evidence in the examples are relevant to my case, I don't have photos of the signage or anything, as the car park is quite far away from where I live, and also this was so long ago. I do not even know the payment method of the car park, if it was pay & display or something else. I don't have evidence of paying. The only thing is my mother was also in the car with me and can provide a statement, will her and my own WS be enough? 

To summarise;

- I did park on the day and for the time period that they say, and as far as I remember I did pay there's no way I would park for 12 hours and not pay, the only explanation is if the payment didn't work for whatever reason

- The evidence they have is a report of payments made, which looks to be manufactured, which doesn't show my number plate. They also have a photo of my car entering and leaving the car park, the later with an ineligible illegible number plate.

I could use some help as I'm not sure which evidence to submit

On you amended notice of allocation is there a date by which both parties have to submit their witness statement and evidence?  Or maybe it is just "not less than fourteen days before the hearing date".  Don't miss that date.  You won't receive any other letter confirming payment of fee, you could check with the local court after the date has passed.  Any passenger in the car can provide a witness statement supporting what you wrote in your defence.

No it doesn't say anything about the deadline for submitting evidence, strange, I guess I'll just make sure it's done before 14 days before the hearing date.
Thank you 

Feyla

Hi again, 
I have now completed a witness statement and gathered the relevent evidence, I'm just waiting for a statement from my mother as evidence also. Is anyone willing and able to have a read over it in a DM? I don't think I should post it here. Also one thing I noticed is that in the ROS letter from civil enforcement they state that thier data retention period is 2 years, so this case greatly exceeds that, and I have included that in my statement.

One more thing, apologies if I missed it but I can't see where I'm meant to send my witness statement and evidence? can anyone shed any light.

Thank you.

Le_Kirk

Witness statement and evidence goes to the court where the hearing is to be held.  Post your WS on the forum and that way more regulars will be able to see it and comment upon it.  If you are worried about anything just redact it but leave the gist otherwise there is nothing to comment on.

Feyla

Here is the witness statement:

I, (NAME), of (ADDRESS), will say as follows:

I make this statement in support of my Defence dated 30/01/2025. I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.

1. Introduction

1.1 I am the Defendant in this claim and the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle (REGISTRATION) on the date of the alleged incident.

1.2 This statement sets out the events and circumstances relevant to the parking charge notice (PCN) issued by Civil Enforcement Limited (the Claimant) concerning an alleged parking contravention at Overline House on 22/02/2019.

2. Circumstances of the Alleged Incident and Lack of Clear Recollection

2.1 The alleged incident occurred over six years ago, on 22/02/2019. Due to the significant passage of time, my specific recollection of the car park layout, signage, and exact payment method is limited. However, I can confirm that I would not intentionally park for an extended period, such as 12 hours, without making payment if required. My standard practice is always to comply with parking regulations.

2.2 My mother, (NAME), was a passenger in the vehicle on that day. She distinctly recalls that payment was made for the parking. Her Witness Statement, confirming this, is attached at Exhibit OL1.

3. Examination of Claimant's Evidence - The 'Payment Report'

3.1 The Claimant has provided a document titled 'Payment report for Overline House on 22/02/2019' as part of their evidence. A copy of this report is attached at Exhibit OL2.

3.2 I contend that this 'Payment Report' appears unreliable and possibly fabricated. Upon reviewing it, I observe several highly questionable entries:

* Duplicate Registrations with Identical Times: For instance, the registration GVUA appears on 22/02/2019 at 10:42:00 and again on 23/02/2019 at 10:42:00. Similarly, NVHC appears on 23/02/2019 at 12:05:00 and again on 24/02/2019 at 12:05:00. It is highly improbable for the exact same vehicle to make a payment at the exact same second on different days.

* Suspiciously Rounded Times: Many entries are precisely on the minute or hour (e.g., 09:03:00, 10:02:00, 10:07:00), which can be indicative of automated or manufactured data rather than genuine transactional timestamps.

3.3 These anomalies cast serious doubt on the authenticity and reliability of the Claimant's 'Payment Report' as genuine evidence of parking payments. I submit that this document should be given no weight by the Court.

4. Examination of Claimant's Evidence - Vehicle Photograph

4.1 The Claimant has also provided a photograph, purportedly of my vehicle, taken at '2019-02-22 23-55-42'. A copy of this photograph is attached at Exhibit OL3.

4.2 I contend that this photograph is entirely unidentifiable as my vehicle. It is taken in extremely poor lighting conditions, appears heavily pixelated or of very low resolution, and the vehicle's make, model, colour, and critically, the registration number, are completely obscured and illegible. It could be a photograph of almost any car.

4.3 This image therefore provides no credible evidence that my vehicle was present at the specified time or that I was the driver.

5. Data Retention and GDPR Compliance

5.1 The alleged parking incident occurred on 22/02/2019. The Claimant has pursued this claim against me, and in doing so, has continued to hold and process my personal data for over six years.

5.2 I note that the Claimant's own data retention policy, as stated in their letter dated 16/08/2023, indicates a data retention period of 2 years. (See Exhibit OL4 - copy of Claimant's letter stating retention policy).

5.3 If the Claimant's stated policy is to retain data for only two years, then their continued holding and processing of my personal data for six years is a direct breach of the storage limitation principle under Article 5(1)(e) of the UK General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Data Protection Act 2018.

5.4 This breach indicates that the Claimant is processing my data unlawfully by retaining it for longer than necessary or than their own stated policy dictates. I submit that this unlawful processing further undermines the legitimacy of their claim and their conduct in pursuing it after such a prolonged period.

6. Reiteration of Defence Points

6.1 Given the unreliability of the Claimant's purported evidence, I reiterate my core defence points already submitted to the Court:

* No Contract Formed/Inadequate Signage: The Claimant has provided no evidence of prominent, clear, or unambiguous signage that could have formed a legally binding contract for a charge of £170. Without such proof, no contract was agreed.

* Disproportionate Charge and Penalty: The charge of £170, particularly with added 'debt fees', is an unconscionable penalty and does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of any loss incurred by the Claimant or landowner.

* Lack of POFA 2012 Compliance: The Claimant is put to strict proof of full compliance with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. My Defence details specific areas of non-compliance.

* Lack of Authority: I deny the Claimant has the necessary authority from the landowner to form contracts or pursue claims in their own name.

* Consumer Rights Act 2015 Breaches: The Claimant's terms and notices, if any existed prominently, would likely breach the fairness and clarity requirements of the CRA 2015.

7. Conclusion

7.1 For the reasons outlined in my Defence and further elaborated in this Witness Statement, particularly given the demonstrably unreliable and unidentifiable nature of the Claimant's own evidence, I respectfully submit that the Claimant's claim has no merit and should be dismissed in its entirety.

Statement of Truth

I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

Let me know what you think, any suggestions welcome.

Thanks

Coupon-mad

Feyla said:

Here is the witness statement:

I, (NAME), of (ADDRESS), will say as follows:

I make this statement in support of my Defence dated 30/01/2025. I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.

1. Introduction

1.1 I am the Defendant in this claim and the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle (REGISTRATION) on the date of the alleged incident.

1.2 This statement sets out the events and circumstances relevant to the parking charge notice (PCN) issued by Civil Enforcement Limited (the Claimant) concerning an alleged parking contravention at Overline House on 22/02/2019.

2. Circumstances of the Alleged Incident and Lack of Clear Recollection

2.1 The alleged incident occurred over six years ago, on 22/02/2019. Due to the significant passage of time, my specific recollection of the car park layout, signage, and exact payment method is limited. However, I can confirm that I would not intentionally park for an extended period, such as 12 hours, without making payment if required. My standard practice is always to comply with parking regulations.

2.2 My mother, (NAME), was a passenger in the vehicle on that day. She distinctly recalls that payment was made for the parking. Her Witness Statement, confirming this, is attached at Exhibit OL1.

3. Examination of Claimant's Evidence - The 'Payment Report'

3.1 The Claimant has provided a document titled 'Payment report for Overline House on 22/02/2019' as part of their evidence. A copy of this report is attached at Exhibit OL2.

3.2 I contend that this 'Payment Report' appears unreliable and possibly fabricated. Upon reviewing it, I observe several highly questionable entries:

* Duplicate Registrations with Identical Times: For instance, the registration GVUA appears on 22/02/2019 at 10:42:00 and again on 23/02/2019 at 10:42:00. Similarly, NVHC appears on 23/02/2019 at 12:05:00 and again on 24/02/2019 at 12:05:00. It is highly improbable for the exact same vehicle to make a payment at the exact same second on different days.

* Suspiciously Rounded Times: Many entries are precisely on the minute or hour (e.g., 09:03:00, 10:02:00, 10:07:00), which can be indicative of automated or manufactured data rather than genuine transactional timestamps.

3.3 These anomalies cast serious doubt on the authenticity and reliability of the Claimant's 'Payment Report' as genuine evidence of parking payments. I submit that this document should be given no weight by the Court.

4. Examination of Claimant's Evidence - Vehicle Photograph

4.1 The Claimant has also provided a photograph, purportedly of my vehicle, taken at '2019-02-22 23-55-42'. A copy of this photograph is attached at Exhibit OL3.

4.2 I contend that this photograph is entirely unidentifiable as my vehicle. It is taken in extremely poor lighting conditions, appears heavily pixelated or of very low resolution, and the vehicle's make, model, colour, and critically, the registration number, are completely obscured and illegible. It could be a photograph of almost any car.

4.3 This image therefore provides no credible evidence that my vehicle was present at the specified time or that I was the driver.

5. Data Retention and GDPR Compliance

5.1 The alleged parking incident occurred on 22/02/2019. The Claimant has pursued this claim against me, and in doing so, has continued to hold and process my personal data for over six years.

5.2 I note that the Claimant's own data retention policy, as stated in their letter dated 16/08/2023, indicates a data retention period of 2 years. (See Exhibit OL4 - copy of Claimant's letter stating retention policy).

5.3 If the Claimant's stated policy is to retain data for only two years, then their continued holding and processing of my personal data for six years is a direct breach of the storage limitation principle under Article 5(1)(e) of the UK General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Data Protection Act 2018.

5.4 This breach indicates that the Claimant is processing my data unlawfully by retaining it for longer than necessary or than their own stated policy dictates. I submit that this unlawful processing further undermines the legitimacy of their claim and their conduct in pursuing it after such a prolonged period.

6. Reiteration of Defence Points

6.1 Given the unreliability of the Claimant's purported evidence, I reiterate my core defence points already submitted to the Court:

* No Contract Formed/Inadequate Signage: The Claimant has provided no evidence of prominent, clear, or unambiguous signage that could have formed a legally binding contract for a charge of £170. Without such proof, no contract was agreed.

* Disproportionate Charge and Penalty: The charge of £170, particularly with added 'debt fees', is an unconscionable penalty and does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of any loss incurred by the Claimant or landowner.

* Lack of POFA 2012 Compliance: The Claimant is put to strict proof of full compliance with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. My Defence details specific areas of non-compliance.

* Lack of Authority: I deny the Claimant has the necessary authority from the landowner to form contracts or pursue claims in their own name.

* Consumer Rights Act 2015 Breaches: The Claimant's terms and notices, if any existed prominently, would likely breach the fairness and clarity requirements of the CRA 2015.

7. Conclusion

7.1 For the reasons outlined in my Defence and further elaborated in this Witness Statement, particularly given the demonstrably unreliable and unidentifiable nature of the Claimant's own evidence, I respectfully submit that the Claimant's claim has no merit and should be dismissed in its entirety.

Statement of Truth

I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

Let me know what you think, any suggestions welcome.

Thanks

That is a very good example of a WS. 

This (below) is astonishing alleged scammery - I really get your point - and I hope the judge tears their rep a new one when this is discussed:

"I contend that this 'Payment Report' appears unreliable and possibly fabricated. Upon reviewing it, I observe several highly questionable entries:

* Duplicate Registrations with Identical Times: For instance, the registration GVUA appears on 22/02/2019 at 10:42:00 and again on 23/02/2019 at 10:42:00. Similarly, NVHC appears on 23/02/2019 at 12:05:00 and again on 24/02/2019 at 12:05:00. It is highly improbable for the exact same vehicle to make a payment at the exact same second on different days.

* Suspiciously Rounded Times: Many entries are precisely on the minute or hour (e.g., 09:03:00, 10:02:00, 10:07:00), which can be indicative of automated or manufactured data rather than genuine transactional timestamps."

I would add Excel v Ambler as an exhibit to support that point. Search the forum.

Le_Kirk

does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of any loss 

I thought we had stopped using GPEOL

1505grandad

"1.1 I am the Defendant in this claim and the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle (REGISTRATION) on the date of the alleged incident."

Driver stated above so following should be amended?

"4.3 This image therefore provides no credible evidence that my vehicle was present at the specified time or that I was the driver."

"* Lack of POFA 2012 Compliance: The Claimant is put to strict proof of full compliance with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. My Defence details specific areas of non-compliance."

Feyla

Coupon-mad said:

snip

That is a very good example of a WS. 

This (below) is astonishing alleged scammery - I really get your point - and I hope the judge tears their rep a new one when this is discussed:

"I contend that this 'Payment Report' appears unreliable and possibly fabricated. Upon reviewing it, I observe several highly questionable entries:

* Duplicate Registrations with Identical Times: For instance, the registration GVUA appears on 22/02/2019 at 10:42:00 and again on 23/02/2019 at 10:42:00. Similarly, NVHC appears on 23/02/2019 at 12:05:00 and again on 24/02/2019 at 12:05:00. It is highly improbable for the exact same vehicle to make a payment at the exact same second on different days.

* Suspiciously Rounded Times: Many entries are precisely on the minute or hour (e.g., 09:03:00, 10:02:00, 10:07:00), which can be indicative of automated or manufactured data rather than genuine transactional timestamps."

I would add Excel v Ambler as an exhibit to support that point. Search the forum.

Thanks! I will search for that and see what I can add.

Le_Kirk said:

does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of any loss 

I thought we had stopped using GPEOL

I'm not sure, should I remove that?

1505grandad said:

"1.1 I am the Defendant in this claim and the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle (REGISTRATION) on the date of the alleged incident."

Driver stated above so following should be amended?

"4.3 This image therefore provides no credible evidence that my vehicle was present at the specified time or that I was the driver."

"* Lack of POFA 2012 Compliance: The Claimant is put to strict proof of full compliance with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. My Defence details specific areas of non-compliance."

Yes good point, I will amend. I think I was just trying to emphasise that the driver cannot be seen in their photo, but as I have already admitted to driving it is a bit contradictory.

Feyla

Hi, I have now submitted my WS and evidence to the court alloaced and the claimant's solicitor, well actually I did 12 days ago. I have not yet recieved a reply from the court, they should reply to confirm they have recieved it right? or is it worth calling them? I did get an automatic response. 

I also got a call from DCB legal a few days ago trying to get me to settle, they intiailly offered £100, I refused and couter offered £10, then they offered £60, I refused again. They have also emailed me saying they would accept £60 and " If you are not agreeable, we will continue to follow the Court process as normal."

Does this look like they have realised they aren't going to win in court or it isn't worth it?