DCBL Strikes again (and I'm up for it)

Coupon-mad

Here you go; a defence from a couple of weeks ago about the same place:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6518968/several-dcbl-letters-received-now-at-claim-form-stage-help-with-defence-needed-asap/p3

All you need to do is change the paragraph 3 to suit your passenger drop off and pick up situation, keeping the stuff under that (quoting from the DLUHC Code) and renumber the original para 4 onwards of the Template Defence, not losing any of it (but don't show us all 30+ paragraphs please...).

Young_saver22

Amazing. Thank you so much; will do!

Young_saver22

Hello all,

I have now completed my defence and have included the amended paragraphs below.

Your thoughts on this would be greatly appreciated!

The facts known to the Defendant:

2. The facts in this defence come from the Defendant's own knowledge and honest belief.  Conversely, the Claimant sets out a cut-and-paste incoherent and sparse statement of case. The POC appear to be in breach of CPR 16.4, 16PD3 and 16PD7, and fail to "state all facts necessary for the purpose of formulating a complete cause of action". The Defendant is unable, on the basis of the POC, to understand with certainty what case, allegation(s) and what heads of cost are being pursued, making it difficult to respond. However, the vehicle is recognised and it is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver.

3.The Defendant had provided a ride to a patient who was in agonising pain post-surgery to collect medication. The patient was also a member of staff at the hospital and guided the Defendant to the designated drop-off point outside Gassiot House Outpatient Centre on the lower ground level (as mentioned on the St Thomas' hospital website). At no point did the Defendant park or leave the car. The Defendant merely pulled up behind various other cars, presumably doing the same thing and the patient disembarked and went inside to collect the medication. A few minutes after this, an aggressive attendant started shouting; to which the Defendant wound down the window before the attendant again shouted and gestured aggressively to move the car which the Defendant did immediately after. The Defendant left the area completely and the patient had to make the walk with the medication to a road in the surrounding area that the Defendant had moved to. No ticket was physically issued at any point on 3rd October 2023.

4. The Defendant believes the reasoning behind the alleged breach of the terms of "the contact" to be ambiguous and misleading because in order for a contact to have been formed with the Defendant, there would have had to have been an offer, an acceptance of that offer; consideration, as well as an intention to create legal relations. Considering this; "No Parking Or Waiting At Anytime" does not satisfy that requirement. On this basis, there could not have been any alleged breach of a ‘contract’ as referenced in the Particulars of Claim.

5.  The Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities ('DLUHC') published in February 2022, a Private Parking Code of Practice which is finally incoming this year.  It intends to end rogue practice and bring parking on private land within similar fairness and 'exempt activity' parameters as apply to on-street rules. It includes the following two fundamental definitions (which stood unchallenged as part of the Judicial Reviews that have delayed the Code) and clarifies unequivocally that dropping off or picking up a passenger is not considered parking.  So important is this rule - to reflect the same exemption as has always been applied by Local Authorities - that it is stated twice: 

"2.19 parked/parking

an instance of a vehicle being caused by the driver to remain stationary other than in the course of driving (excluding instances where the driver has stopped to enable passengers leave or enter the vehicle).

2.24 parking period

the length of time that a vehicle has been parked, i.e. left stationary otherwise than in the course of driving, after any relevant consideration period has expired (excluding instances where the driver has stopped to enable passengers to leave or enter the vehicle)."

6. Further to the above, the Defendant received no direct correspondence whatsoever from the Claimant, National Parking Control Group Limited. The first instance of the Defendant being informed of this matter was a threatening letter from DCB Legal Ltd demanding £170 on 21st November 2023. This is wholly unfair and has caused the Defendant great distress.

Many thanks in advance!

KeithP

Young_saver22 said:

6. Further to the above, the Defendant received no direct correspondence whatsoever from the Claimant, National Parking Control Group Limited. The first instance of the Defendant being informed of this matter was a threatening letter from DCB Legal Ltd demanding £170 on 21st November 2023. This is wholly unfair and has caused the Defendant great distress.

I'll just comment on that one point.

Could it be that your vehicle's Registration Document(V5c) has the wrong keeper's address on it?
That can easily be corrected on the DVLA's website.

It is important that both the court and the claimant have your correct address for service.

Young_saver22

KeithP said:

Young_saver22 said:

6. Further to the above, the Defendant received no direct correspondence whatsoever from the Claimant, National Parking Control Group Limited. The first instance of the Defendant being informed of this matter was a threatening letter from DCB Legal Ltd demanding £170 on 21st November 2023. This is wholly unfair and has caused the Defendant great distress.

I'll just comment on that one point.

Could it be that your vehicle's Registration Document(V5c) has the wrong keeper's address on it?
That can easily be corrected on the DVLA's website.

It is important that both the court and the claimant have your correct address for service.

Thanks Keith.

It's definitely correct as I bought this car in June and the address was changed some weeks later in July, well in advance of this incident. I explicitly remember this as the wait caused it's own hooha! Also, I've lived at my current address for over 15 years so hopefully all should be in order!

Fruitcake

You should refer to Jopson v Homeguard, case number B9GF0A9E, where the judge stated that dropping off/picking up is not parking. This was an appeal case and is therefore persuasive on the lower courts.

Young_saver22

Thanks @Fruitcake!

Happy to include; however considering that the sign read ' no waiting' and technically the patient went into the hospital and I 'waited' for her to come out, would this be particularly persuasive?

Fruitcake

Admit nothing. You were dropping off and picking up. Let the judge decide otherwise.

Young_saver22

Thanks again @Fruitcake; understood!

Any other takers for feedback? Other than the addition I'm assuming nothing else needs to be amended or removed?

Coupon-mad

It looks fine as long as all the rest of the Template Defence will follow (don't show us...)!