UKPC/DCB Legal Court Claim

nrtdlx

Hi All,

I received a court claim from DCB Legal dated 07/02/2024. The PCN was sent 5 month ago. Long story short I stopped to buy three bags of frozen food and I was there less than 10 minutes, no ticket was displayed on my car, only received PCN in the post. No road markings were present, only a tiny sign on the wall.

I am familiar with the small claims track and I have done it before but I have never received a claim for a parking offence. I already acknowledged the claim on the MCOL portal two days ago but I have not filed in a defence yet.

I read the newbie thread and already copied the template but I am not sure what to put in to the 2nd and 3rd paragraph. I read it somewhere if it is from DCB Legal then I would need to use the “Chan” bit in my defence. Still not sure what to add for the 2nd. Could someone please advise?

This is my POC:

1.    The Defendant (D) is indebted to the Claimant (C) for a Parking Charge(s) issued to vehicle (car reg) at (location)
2.    The PCN(s) were issued on (date)
3.    The defendant is pursued as the driver of the vehicle for breach of the terms on the signs (the contract). Reason: Parked In A Loading Place During Restricted Hours Without Loading.
4.    In the alternative the defendant is pursued as the keeper pursuant to POFA 2012, Schedule 4.
AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS
1.    £170 being the total of the PCN(s) and damages.
2.    Interest at the rate of 8% per annum pursuant to s.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 from the date hereof at a daily rate of £.02 until judgement or sooner payment.
3.    Costs and court fees.

Previously when I filed in a defence I used N9B form www.gov.uk/government/publications/form-n9b-defence-counterclaim-specified-amount
According to my research here it is advised to file the defence in email using template as a pdf. Did I get this right?

Thanks for reading

Coupon-mad

You aren't using Chan because they have specified the breach in the POC.  As explained in the third para of the Template Defence.

KeithP

nrtdlx said:

I received a court claim from DCB Legal dated 07/02/2024.
I already acknowledged the claim on the MCOL portal two days ago but I have not filed in a defence yet.

Hello and welcome.

With a Claim Issue Date of 7th February, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 11th March 2024 to file your Defence.

That's four weeks 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'.

nrtdlx

Coupon-mad said:

You aren't using Chan because they have specified the breach in the POC.  As explained in the third para of the Template Defence.

What can I say? Use the 2nd paragraph as it is and put my story in 3rd that I was only there for less than 10 minutes? Isn't 10 minutes the grace period? There was also no ticket on windscreen so this could be procedurally false as well?

I do not want to leave it til March, I would like to preferably send it as soon as I can.

Thanks

nrtdlx

Procedureally flawed not false, sorry

Coupon-mad

I'd be saying as para 3 that the driver was a patron of the store and the Claimant is put to strict proof that the driver was not loading.  The photographs seen at pre-action stage do not evidence this and were taken within minutes. The images must have been by a lurking self-ticketer with an iphone, which is predatory conduct, and no grace period was allowed.  Loading bays usually allow up to 20 minutes to fetch and load items and the driver would not have been with the vehicle whilst inside the premises.  The Claimant is put to strict proof of all allegations and that the full t&cs of the alleged contract were prominent and legible to a driver at this bay.

Le_Kirk

You were loading! What about your three heavy boxes of frozen food? What happened when you complained to the retailer?

nrtdlx

Coupon-mad said:

I'd be saying as para 3 that the driver was a patron of the store and the Claimant is put to strict proof that the driver was not loading.  The photographs seen at pre-action stage do not evidence this and were taken within minutes. The images must have been by a lurking self-ticketer with an iphone, which is predatory conduct, and no grace period was allowed.  Loading bays usually allow up to 20 minutes to fetch and load items and the driver would not have been with the vehicle whilst inside the premises.  The Claimant is put to strict proof of all allegations and that the full t&cs of the alleged contract were prominent and legible to a driver at this bay.

It was a supermarket at a back of shopping center area, not sure the patron thing would fly in this case.

The rest is good info, thanks.

Le_Kirk said:

You were loading! What about your three heavy boxes of frozen food? What happened when you complained to the retailer?

I have not complained to the retailer. I thought the missing ticket from the windscreen would simply invalidate their claim. I won an appeal against a council in a similar situation a couple of years ago.

Coupon-mad

Eh? I wrote those words specifically for someone who was a patron of the supermarket.  I knew your circumstances. Those words are what you need as defence facts. That is bespoke for your case.

We know what we are doing.

This has no legs:

 I thought the missing ticket from the windscreen would simply invalidate their claim. I won an appeal against a council in a similar situation a couple of years ago

nrtdlx

Hi,

I filed in a defence in email and got the automated response.

I used your suggestions in previous comments.

Claimant is put to strict proof that the driver was not loading.  The photographs seen at pre-action stage do not evidence this and were taken within minutes. The images must have been by a lurking self-ticketer with a smartphone, which is predatory conduct, and no grace period was allowed.  Loading bays usually allow up to 20 minutes to fetch and load items and the driver would not have been with the vehicle whilst inside the premises. The Claimant is put to strict proof of all allegations and that the full terms & conditions of the alleged contract were prominent and legible to a driver at this bay.

I will update the thread once there is further progress.

Thanks for your help

nrtdlx

Hi there,

As I promised I am updating this thread, DCB Legal has discontinued the court proceedings and closed the file today. Just received the email. I attach the N279 for all of you to see.

Thank you very much @Coupon-mad for all your help.

A little timeline for anyone who is interested or find themselves in a similar situation:

30/08/2023 - Parking charge date

07/02/2024 - Issue date of court claim

10/02/2024 - Acknowledgement of service submitted

22/02/2024 - Defence submitted

06/03/2024 - DQ sent to me

06/03/2024 - DQ filed by claimant

07/03/2024 - DQ sent to court and claimant. That was the time where the DQ email address has been changed so I sent it to the old and new address as well however it was not updated on the portal. I was a little bit worried as I did not want to claimant to win by default judgement. I called CNBC (it was over an hour hold) as asked about the DQ sent. I had proof of automated replies and told them I could forward it if necessary. Portal got updated the next day, it was 09/05/2024.

09/05/2024 - Claim was transferred to my local county court

23/08/2024 - Received letter about court hearing to be held on 22/11/2024, hearing fee was due by 25/10/2024.

23/08/2024 - DBC Legal sent me a settlement offer in email. I thanked their offer and said I would rather have the court make a determination on the matter.

20/09/2024 - DCB Legal has discontinued the case by filing N279.