Euro Car Parks | DCB Legal & Court Forms

JN33

Coupon-mad said:

JN33 said:

Coupon-mad said:

She should just use email, and the phrases I suggested will mean you will get a PCN.

She received a response from QDR saying that the keeper had 28 days to transfer liability and has been instructed by ZZPS that she still remains liable, giving 14 days to pay the £170 which definitely won't be getting paid. 

She don't want to go to court, but I guess she will to defend me... She has proof of tracker activity of the other car she was driving that day to prove it wasn't her driving, and I also have the proof of the ticket payment and picture of the ticket to prove it was paid for but using the wrong reg so I guess if this goes to court, we stand a high chance of winning.

She DOESN'T take that from them...!

She now replies - salutation is 'Dear Sirs' (of course) and she tells them to read the BPA Parking News Article which considered this POFA 'transfer of liability' issue and confirmed that the correct legal position is that there is no 28 day cut-off.  Of course a keeper can name the driver at any time prior to commencement of litigation.

Attach a link to it.  It is on this forum in a thread I started about BPA Parking News.

She then tells QDR these exact words:

Cease and desist. Any further contact or processing of my data will evidence a course of conduct of harassment of the wrong party, being a clear and ongoing breach of the DPA 2018 and UKGDPR.

I have transferred liability exactly as intended by the POFA.  Get used to it, ZZPS (or is it QDR...who knows or cares). This position does not leave your clients with no remedy.  They must pause debt collection and rewind the case, re-issuing the PCN at the original rates, to the driver.

As for my remedy:

Failure to cease and desist will result in a counterclaim, should a claim be filed now against me, the non-liable keeper.  QDR will also be reported to the SRA and ICO.

I trust my position is clear and I expect to hear no more about this tiresome rogue 'PCN'.

Yours faithfully,

I have now received a DCBL Final Notice - shall I forward a similar series of email threads to those stating at the point of which we received QDR letters we attempted to transferred liability, failure to cease and desist will result in a counter claim - or do I go straight to QDR now with a counter claim for not ceasing.

Is there any recommended guidance on filing a report to the SRA/ICO about this also?

-JN

Coupon-mad

Send the same to DCB Ltd as she sent to QDR. She cannot be held liable.

DCB Legal always issue court claims for ECP now. Enormous batch of ECP claims on this forum this Summer and she can copy any recent ECP defence when the time comes.

SHE WILL GET A CLAIM.

IT IS EXACTLY WHAT SHE WANTS!

DCB Legal will discontinue in 2025 and it will all finally end for good. No CCJ risked by defending and letting them discontinue.

JN33

Coupon-mad said:

Send the same to DCB Ltd as she sent to QDR. She cannot be held liable.

DCB Legal always issue court claims for ECP now. Enormous batch of ECP claims on this forum this Summer and she can copy any recent ECP defence when the time comes.

SHE WILL GET A CLAIM.

IT IS EXACTLY WHAT SHE WANTS!

DCB Legal will discontinue in 2025 and it will all finally end for good. No CCJ risked by defending and letting them discontinue.

Thank you emailed their collections email (only one I could find online) with the following: 

Hi,
I have received a letter titled "FINAL NOTICE OF DEBT RECOVERY". I have previously advised QDR Solicitors that I was not the driver of the vehicle when said offence occurred and that I transferred ALL liability to the driver who I named and provided contact details for, those driver details are as follows:

Title & Name here
Address here

Your client must now pause ALL debt recovery and send the driver a PCN to appeal. 

Cease and desist. Any further contact or processing of my data will evidence a course of conduct of harassment of the wrong party, being a clear and ongoing breach of the DPA 2018 and UKGDPR.

I have transferred liability exactly as intended by the POFA. Get used to it, ZZPS (or is it DCBL...who knows or cares). This position does not leave your clients with no remedy.  

They must pause debt collection and rewind the case, re-issuing the PCN at the original rates, to the driver. As for my remedy: Failure to cease and desist will result in a counterclaim, should a claim be filed now against me, the non-liable keeper.  

DCBL will also be reported to the SRA and ICO. I trust my position is clear and I expect to hear no more about this tiresome rogue 'PCN'.

Yours faithfully,
{Name}

KeithP

JN33 said:

This position does not leave your clients with no remedy.  

A double negative there.
Needs to be either "This position does not leave your clients with any remedy" or "This position leaves your clients with no remedy".
I prefer the first, but it's your choice.

And another preference of mine is never to start a formal business letter or email with 'Hi'.
'Dear Sirs' is much more appropriate.

Coupon-mad

The sentence "This position does not leave your clients with no remedy" is in fact correct but clunky.  Would read better as:

This position does not leave your clients without a remedy.  

JN33

Coupon-mad said:

The sentence "This position does not leave your clients with no remedy" is in fact correct but clunky.  Would read better as:

This position does not leave your clients without a remedy.  

Thanks for your help, I have since had a response from DCBL. 

Their response is as follows: 

We write further to your recent email.

We are instructed by our client to recover the outstanding balance in relation to the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) issued to you.

Please note, the timeframe in which to transfer liability has now expired. You were given the opportunity to transfer liability to a named driver when the initial PCN was issued to you. You remain liable for the outstanding balance as the person named by our client as responsible for payment.

Having reviewed your case, we believe it is in the interest of both parties that we speak with you to see if we can reach a resolution.

That said, please could you reply with your contact number and one of our Case Managers will give you a call during our office hours.

-----


Bare in mind the parking charge comes from a car park where I DID pay for parking, however I did use the wrong registration number since we'd recently removed our private VRN. So in theory, I did pay.... 

I also understand there is no time window in which a transfer of liability has to be done by, as you previously commented 'She now replies - salutation is 'Dear Sirs' (of course) and she tells them to read the BPA Parking News Article which considered this POFA 'transfer of liability' issue and confirmed that the correct legal position is that there is no 28 day cut-off.  Of course a keeper can name the driver at any time prior to commencement of litigation.'

Do I just reply back with this again. 

Dear Sirs, 
I would like to keep all correspondence in written format, to better plead my case in court with factual information when you escalate this case. I am not willing to disclose my telephone number. 

Please read the BPA Parking News Article which considered this POFA 'transfer of liability' issue and confirmed that the correct legal position is that there is no 28 day cut-off.  Of course a keeper can name the driver at any time prior to commencement of litigation.

I have taken the time to find the BPA Parking News link for you: https://portfolio.cpl.co.uk/Parking-News/395/26/#search:liability

In fact, I have gone one step further and specifically found the paragraphs you're looking for:
"The notice to keeper warns the keeper that if, after 28 days after the notice to keeper is served, the PCN has not been paid and the creditor does not know the name and current address for service of the driver, the parking company will have the right to recover the unpaid amount from the keeper (POFA paragraph 8(2)(f) and paragraph (9)(2)(f))."

"However, not withstanding the time limit imposed on the keeper by paragraphs 8(2)(f) and 9(2)(f), this right is taken away if the parking company is provided with the driver's details before it 'begins proceedings'. This creates a further window during which the keeper can avoid liability..."

I have since provided both QDR and yourselves with the driver's details ahead of any 'proceedings'. 

Yours faithfully, 
{NAME}

Coupon-mad

I think quote the law at them as well.

Schedule 4 says that the right to pursue a keeper does not exist once the driver's name and address are known.  That is either in Sch4 itself or in Explanatory note 221 or 223.  

JN33

Coupon-mad said:

I think quote the law at them as well.

Schedule 4 says that the right to pursue a keeper does not exist once the driver's name and address are known.  That is either in Sch4 itself or in Explanatory note 221 or 223.  

I did exactly that and got the same reply QDR tried. 

"We write further to your recent email.

We are instructed by our client to recover the outstanding balance in relation to the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) issued to you.

As previously advised, the timeframe in which to transfer liability has expired. You were given the opportunity to transfer liability to a named driver when the initial PCN was issued to you. You remain liable for the outstanding balance as the person named by our client as responsible for payment."

Looking forward to the letter before claim arriving.

Coupon-mad

Can I remind you about the end of your first letter.  This wasn't an idle threat:

"DCBL will also be reported to the SRA and ICO. I trust my position is clear..."

Now do those two complaints.

JN33

My wife has finally received the HM Courts & Tribunals Service letter stating Euro Car Parks are claiming for a total of £282.32 Issued 28th Jan, Northampton.

I am assuming I just follow the guidance suggested here:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5546325/court-claim-procedure-updated-october-2016/p1