Met Parking & DCBL Civil National Business Centre

GoldenRetriver12

Hey all,

Looking for your support with a claim via MCOL from Met Parking/DCB Legal.

Issue date - 13/12/23
AOS sent - 24/12/23
AOS received - 28/12/23

I've used the draft and have only adapted the following;

Point 2, with;

However, the vehicle is recognised and it is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver.

Point 3 the defence

3. The Defendant went to BP Stansted SF Connect and purchased food and drink at the BP/M&S convenience store located on site at this petrol station. The Defendant then left the site, having spent a short period of time in the convenience store, to go back to work on the airport grounds.

The Defendant had not noticed any signage close to the where the Defendant parked his vehicle, showing the terms and conditions for use, the Defendant was not aware of any restrictions that applied.

There was no notification of the first PCN and upon receiving the second PCN the Defendant researched and found that Parking Restriction signs on the BF Stansted SF Connect petrol station were small, obscure, and positioned in out of the way places. The above paragraph explains why the Defendant, and no doubt most other customers of BP Stansted, did not see the Parking Restriction signs.

The defendant did not receive any pre-action protocols from the claimant or their legal representatives in the form of a Letter Before Claim.

Point 29 & 30 - Costs we are still reviewing if we will add.

Do you suggest we change any other points and what other information would you need to support us here?

Silly question, should the hyperlinks stay in the defence or are they for advice for example in point 9 or 10?

Does anyone know how to view the POC's via MCOL?

Thanks in advance and apologies for many questions in the first post

Coupon-mad

OMG I am so sorry we didn't reply...I didn't see your post, as a batch from 3rd Jan got marked as 'read' (a recent glitch of the supposedly improved forum - drives me mad!).

We help everyone. You'll be fine now your thread is rescued.  Hyperlinks in the template defence stay.  Don't change those paragraphs.

Show us your claim form (redacted of password etc).

GoldenRetriver12

Hey no worries at all, I am grateful for any help! 

We have a slight issue in that, the claim form isn't readable anymore, luckily wrote down the claim number for MCOL. Trying to contact the CCBC for a copy of the N1 form. 

KeithP

GoldenRetriver12 said:

Issue date - 13/12/23
AOS sent - 24/12/23
AOS received - 28/12/23

With a Claim Issue Date of 13th December, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 15th January 2024 to file your Defence.

That's just one 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'.

Coupon-mad

GoldenRetriver12 said:

Hey no worries at all, I am grateful for any help! 

We have a slight issue in that, the claim form isn't readable anymore, luckily wrote down the claim number for MCOL. Trying to contact the CCBC for a copy of the N1 form. 

You won't get a full copy but you can ask them to email you the Particulars of Claim.

GoldenRetriver12

1. The Defendant(D) is indebted to the Claimant (C) for a Parking Charge(s) issued to vehicle XYZ at XYZ

2. The PCN(s) were issued XX/XX/2018 and XX/XX/2018
3.The PCN(s) was issued on private land owned or managed by C. The vehicle was parked in breach of the Terms on Cs signs (the Contract), thus incurring the PCN(s).

It's been a struggle to get that information, but is similar to all/majority of MET Parking/DCBL within this forum.

KeithP

GoldenRetriver12 said:

1. The Defendant(D) is indebted to the Claimant (C) for a Parking Charge(s) issued to vehicle XYZ at XYZ

2. The PCN(s) were issued XX/XX/2018 and XX/XX/2018
3.The PCN(s) was issued on private land owned or managed by C. The vehicle was parked in breach of the Terms on Cs signs (the Contract), thus incurring the PCN(s).

It's been a struggle to get that information, but is similar to all/majority of MET Parking/DCBL within this forum.

Is that all it says?
Nothing about what the driver is alleged to have done wrong?
Nothing about any assumption that the keeper was the driver?
Nothing about how much money they are claiming and the make up of that sum?

Fruitcake

It would be better if you could show us a copy of just the PoC, with everything else redacted.

Umkomaas

Keep going through all the phases, then end up mentioned in dispatches in this thread:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6377263/dcb-legal-record-of-private-parking-court-claim-discontinuations/p1

Coupon-mad

GoldenRetriver12 said:

1. The Defendant(D) is indebted to the Claimant (C) for a Parking Charge(s) issued to vehicle XYZ at XYZ

2. The PCN(s) were issued XX/XX/2018 and XX/XX/2018
3.The PCN(s) was issued on private land owned or managed by C. The vehicle was parked in breach of the Terms on Cs signs (the Contract), thus incurring the PCN(s).

It's been a struggle to get that information, but is similar to all/majority of MET Parking/DCBL within this forum.

Please show all of the POC.

GoldenRetriver12

Hey all, thanks for your support, the issue was the POC's via letter were no longer readable. 

We submitted our defence via email and have had the DCB legal response (as expected).



Along with their questionnaire (as expected).





We are now awaiting our questionnaire and following the steps in the newbies thread. I was just wondering if any of the above was against the norm and for us to watch out for.

Thanks again for your support and time