CEL , DCB Legal court claim Received

Coupon-mad

All these cases are the same. Same advice:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6566038/dcb-legal-euro-car-parks-defence-help/p2

Dunno what the regulars think but I'm all-defenced-out for DCB Legal claims.  Literally seen enough repetition ... no disrespect to posters seeking help! Disrespect to DCB Legal.

Apart from the ones they do for ParkingEye (no breach pleaded) all these cases are the same and instead of discussing what to put for para 3 we could just signpost to a thread.

pooring2002

Thank you both for the response. With the defence, paragraph 3, am I describing what exactly happened that day regarding my disabled sons breakdown from his colitis and losing my car key or is it just a vague nothing memorable happened on that day and dont know who the driver was (me or husband)? 

With the brief time i've managed to get, common theme seems to be dcb legal throwing out multiple claims to bully those into paying but don't follow through with going to court?

edit: Sorry updated and deleted.

Gr1pr

Plus I strongly suggest that you change the thread title to emphasise the change in circumstances, to

CEL , DCB Legal court claim 

pooring2002

I have submitted the acknowledgment of service now as advised. Hopefully someone would be kind enough to check the defense i've pasted above to check if all looks ok or if anything is missing. Thank you

Coupon-mad

Please delete that post.  Nobody will read the full template defence and it makes your thread too long.

I linked you to a thread to copy your 'bit' from.

pooring2002

Coupon-mad said:

Please delete that post.  Nobody will read the full template defence and it makes your thread too long.

I linked you to a thread to copy your 'bit' from.

Hi Coupon, yes I followed that link and copied paragraph 3 exactly as stated. The rest I used from someone else's defence so thought the mash up of them both together would suffice. Hope that's ok. Appreciate the response ☺️

Gr1pr

You should post your adapted paragraphs ONLY, typically paragraphs 2 & 3 , no need to make it harder 

No need for the rest 

Once completed, you slot them back into the template defence by coupon mad, not someone else's defence , keep it simple and follow the advice 

Please also note, there is no S in the word Defence 

Coupon-mad

You seem to have missed this:

"Please delete that post.  Nobody will read the full template defence and it makes your thread too long."

We do not want ANY posts showing the template defence & it'll actually stop us reading it (sorry, I haven't read it). We also don't want or need to see the headings nor paragraph one.

pooring2002

Hi, sorry edited last post and deleted defence.

If somone could kindly check if this is sufficient and I will email them defence today. Thank you

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.

3. The Defendant has no recollection of the alleged parking incident on the date in question. It was an unremarkable day with nothing memorable about the circumstances, and the Defendant is unable to recall any event that might relate to the claim. The Defendant cannot confirm whether they were the driver on that day. The Claimant has failed to provide photographic evidence or any other proof that the Defendant's vehicle was parked in breach of terms, or that a Parking Charge Notice was issued and visible on the vehicle. Without adequate evidence, the Defendant cannot verify the validity of the claim. Furthermore, the Claimant has not demonstrated that sufficient signage or terms were clearly displayed and visible to the Defendant or any driver of the vehicle on that day to create a binding contractual obligation. The Defendant also questions the Claimant's right to recover the alleged sums in light of unclear evidence of their legal standing or authority to operate on the land in question.

3.1. Referring to the POC: paragraph 1 is denied. The Defendant is not indebted to the Claimant. Paragraph 2 is denied. No PCN was "issued on 17/02/2023" (the date of the visit). While the Defendant was the registered keeper, it is denied that they are liable as there is no evidence to confirm a breach of prominent terms. The quantum is hugely exaggerated (no PCN can be £170 on private land) and there were no damages incurred whatsoever. The Claimant is put to strict proof of all their allegations.

Thank you all

Gr1pr

2 is incomplete,  no ending  ( people always seem to ignore paragraph 2   )

3.1 should be 3

If you are determined to use para 3 above,  make it 3.1