Euro Car Parks | DCB Legal & Court Forms

LDast

What was the result of the two complaints you were supposed to make?

KeithP

JN33 said:

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.

With a Claim Issue Date of 28th January, you have until Monday 17th February 2025 to file an Acknowledgment of Service('AOS'), but there is nothing to be gained by delaying it. 

To file an AOS, follow the guidance in the Dropbox file linked from the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Having filed an AOS in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 3rd March 2025 to file a Defence.

That's over 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 again at the second post on the NEWBIES thread - immediately following where you found the AOS guidance.

Don't miss the deadline for filing an AOS, nor that for filing a Defence.

Do not try and file a Defence via the MoneyClaimOnline website. Once an AOS has been filed, the MCOL website should be treated as 'read only'.

Everywhere I have written 'you' or 'your' I do of course mean the named Defendant. 
Everything must be done in the name of the named Defendant.

JN33 said:

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

A rash assumption.   
That is quite old - over eight years old in fact. Earlier in this post I suggest where to find up to date guidance.

Gr1pr

Stick to the following threads,  as mentioned by KeithP etc

The newbies sticky thread in announcements near the top of the forum 

The defence template thread in announcements near the top of the forum 

Any recent relevant court claim threads within the last 6 months  ( not a 9 year old thread   )

Coupon-mad

JN33 said:

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 

No.

Is the Claim from DCB Legal?

In most current defences v DCB Legal claims, paragraph 3 looks similar to the thread below by @shahib_02  ... just change the incident date:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6576011/cel-dcb-legal-pcn-cnbc-claim-defence-assistance-required-please

No need for more detail, except in your wife's case, add an extra paragraph 3.1 stating that the Defendant is not liable in law because she was not driving and had already transferred liability to the driver twice in 2024, once on DATE to QDR solicitors, who gave up the pursuit, then again on DATE to DCB Group, who know full well (and were told in writing by the exasperated Defendant) that a registered keeper cannot be pursued in cases where the driver's name and address are known before court action.

JN33

Coupon-mad said:

JN33 said:

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 

No.

Is the Claim from DCB Legal?

In most current defences v DCB Legal claims, paragraph 3 looks similar to the thread below by @shahib_02  ... just change the incident date:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6576011/cel-dcb-legal-pcn-cnbc-claim-defence-assistance-required-please

No need for more detail, except in your wife's case, add an extra paragraph 3.1 stating that the Defendant is not liable in law because she was not driving and had already transferred liability to the driver twice in 2024, once on DATE to QDR solicitors, who gave up the pursuit, then again on DATE to DCB Group, who know full well (and were told in writing by the exasperated Defendant) that a registered keeper cannot be pursued in cases where the driver's name and address are known before court action.

Yes, DCB Legal.
This is perfect thank you - I will draft it up and get it sorted first thing next week.

JN33

LDast said:

What was the result of the two complaints you were supposed to make?

I actually haven't heard anything back and completely forgot about those - I will chase them up and follow up on this thread with the outcome.

Car1980

Whilst the usual defence will result in eventual discontinuation, why drag it out? This looks ripe for immediate strike out.

Can I suggest something a lot shorter:

1. The Defendant is the Registered Keeper of vehicle AB1 2CD but was not the driver at the dates and times submitted by the Claimant.

2. This was communicated to the Claimants's solicitors 'QDR' on 01/02/03 and their second solicitor / bulk litigator 'DCB Legal'' on 04/05/06 by means of informing them of the name and address of the driver.

3. 'DCB Legal' refused the lawful transfer of liability and replied stating “Please note the timeframe in which to transfer liability has expired. You were given the opportunity to transfer liability to a named driver when the initial Parking Charge Notice was issued to you. You remain liable for the outstanding balance as the registered keeper of the vehicle”.

4. The Claimant's solicitor misunderstands the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, or is purposefully misrepresenting what it states. The 28 day time period is not a deadline or “transfer of liability window”. By naming the driver of the vehicle above any obligations as keeper have been discharged, and this can be made at any time up until proceedings:

Right to claim unpaid parking charges from keeper of vehicle

4(1) The creditor has the right to recover any unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle.

(2) The right under this paragraph applies only if—

(a) the conditions specified in paragraphs 5 [are met]

Conditions that must be met for purposes of paragraph 4

5(1)The first condition is that the creditor—

(a) has the right to enforce against the driver of the vehicle the requirement to pay the unpaid parking charges; but

(b) is unable to take steps to enforce that requirement against the driver because the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver.

(2) Sub-paragraph (1)(b) ceases to apply if (at any time after the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the day on which the notice to keeper is given) the creditor begins proceedings to recover the unpaid parking charges from the keeper.

5. Once the claimant has actual knowledge of the driver identity (name and address), the conditions in paragraph 5 are no longer met, so the right to pursue the keeper is extinguished.

6. Therefore it is requested that the claim be struck out Under CPR 3.4 (2)(a) as statement of case discloses no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim.

7. In the alternative, the court under its case management powers orders the Claimant to provide further and better particulars, with the exact wording of the contract they rely upon and the Defendant be given time to submit a substitute defence.

Coupon-mad

The OP could ask Jackson Yamba (see the thread yesterday about this) to do the strike-out on a 'no-win-no-fee' basis but I'm unsure if you can take that route if the claim has been acknowledged.

Coupon-mad

Can you change your thread title from QDR?

JN33

Coupon-mad said:

Can you change your thread title from QDR?

Updated, I have been away from home this week. I will also submit my AOS today/Monday latest and keep you in the loop.

It requires me to login on the Government Gateway and need the wifes credentials when using the moneyclaim.gov.uk website.