Claim Form - DCB Legal - County Court Business Centre

patient_dream

Revolt said:

I'm trying to get my defence paragraph sorted this evening, can I clarify something please.

I have previously sent a SAR which they replied to with images of my car entering and leaving the carpark with a timestamp however they didn't include any pictures of the signs is this simply because with a SAR I can only request images of myself / vehicle?

Previous replies mentioned a weak PoC - What makes it weak? Should it include the terms of the apparent breach?

Is it safe to post the pictures I've received in the SAR of the vehicle entering and exiting the car park?

it's safe just redact personal info

Revolt

These are the 2 images of entering and exiting the carpark with timestamp, there's also closeup ANPR of the numberplate.

Coupon-mad

Revolt said:

I'm trying to get my defence paragraph sorted this evening, can I clarify something please.

I have previously sent a SAR which they replied to with images of my car entering and leaving the carpark with a timestamp however they didn't include any pictures of the signs is this simply because with a SAR I can only request images of myself / vehicle?

Previous replies mentioned a weak PoC - What makes it weak? Should it include the terms of the apparent breach?

The Template Defence covers the weak POC situation and it already states what is missing.  You just need to add your facts, and the Template Defence suggests what that is (or browse other claim threads for inspiration).

patient_dream

Revolt said:

These are the 2 images of entering and exiting the carpark with timestamp, there's also closeup ANPR of the numberplate.

What do these pictures prove ?   

Revolt

They simply prove the car entered and exited at those times.

Would you just state therefore that the driver wasn't aware of any signage or terms upon entering and believed that this business' car parks were free to park having parked at others previously (not this site)

Is it worth mentioning the entrance to the car park being from a dual carriageway on a U bend into the car park?

patient_dream

Revolt said:

They simply prove the car entered and exited at those times.

Would you just state therefore that the driver wasn't aware of any signage or terms upon entering and believed that this business' car parks were free to park having parked at others previously (not this site)

Is it worth mentioning the entrance to the car park being from a dual carriageway on a U bend into the car park?

UKPC signs are rubbish ..... did the entrance have clear signs ?

We already know that UKPC signs in a car park are unreadable

DCBL love these UKPC rubbish cases which is why so far, they have discontinued 180 cases, mostly UKPC .... Enjoy this playtime with DCBL

Follow the leader ... that's this forum 

Revolt

I have just found out how to check old pictures on google maps (I didn't even realise you could do this) and there are plenty of pictures of the entrance.

There is no large sign at all or any sign at the entrance they are only on some poles after entering but not between where I believe I parked and the entrance to the building.

It looks like they added a small sign to a fence in 2019 but again drivers are likely to miss that and you are already pretty much in the car park.

Revolt

Please could somebody scrutinise the below - I have confirmed to be the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle in section 2.

3. Owing to the fact the incident happened over five years ago the Defendant cannot recall seeing any signs related to time-limited parking either on entry to the carpark or between the parking bay and entrance to the McDonalds. 

Furthermore the defendant argues it was not commonplace in July 2018 for the well known McDonalds franchise to impose such parking limits at any of their privately owned carparks which the Defendant had visited previously.

Revolt

Revolt said:

Please could somebody scrutinise the below - I have confirmed to be the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle in section 2.

3. Owing to the fact the incident happened over five years ago the Defendant cannot recall seeing any signs related to time-limited parking either on entry to the carpark or between the parking bay and entrance to the McDonalds. 

Furthermore the defendant argues it was not commonplace in July 2018 for the well known McDonalds franchise to impose such parking limits at any of their privately owned carparks which the Defendant had visited previously.

Sorry to be a pain - does this look OK? I'm planning to print, sign and email this today before 4pm.

KeithP

Revolt said:

Revolt said:

Please could somebody scrutinise the below - I have confirmed to be the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle in section 2.

3. Owing to the fact the incident happened over five years ago the Defendant cannot recall seeing any signs related to time-limited parking either on entry to the carpark or between the parking bay and entrance to the McDonalds. 

Furthermore the defendant argues it was not commonplace in July 2018 for the well known McDonalds franchise to impose such parking limits at any of their privately owned carparks which the Defendant had visited previously.

Sorry to be a pain - does this look OK? I'm planning to print, sign and email this today before 4pm.

I did write earlier...

KeithP said:

...you have until 4pm on Wednesday 6th September 2023 to file your Defence.