DCB Legal Court Hearing 28th August

InconspicuousSheep21

@Coupon-mad, I did get a CCJ (please see the original post), the CCJ was successfully set aside due to it having been incorrectly served at an address I did not reside at. 

I am struggling to find the witness statement and evidence bundle being worked on tonight, would anyone kindly let me know of the individuals username so I might have some luck finding it please!

DCB filed and served a Draft Order prior to the hearing to set aside the CCJ, the contents were as follows:

Before an Officer of the Court

UPON the Claimant and the Defendant having agreed to the terms of this Order;

AND UPON the Claimant accepting that, although the claim was correctly served at the Defendant’s last known address pursuant to CPR 6.9, the Defendant did not receive the claim form and therefore did not have opportunity to defend the claim;

AND UPON the Defendant alleging that they were an employee on the Land, and potentially have a good prospect of defending the Claim.

AND UPON the parties agreeing that, in view of the above, there is some other good reason for Judgment to be set aside pursuant to CPR 13.3;

IT IS ORDERED THAT:-

1. The Judgment entered on 30/05/2023 is set aside;

2. The registration is cancelled;

3. The Claim be allocated to the Small Claims Track and the Defendant be ordered to file a Defence within 14 days of this sealed Order;

4. The Claimant be at liberty to request Judgment in default should the Defendant fail to file a Defence;

5. No Order as to costs. 

Coupon-mad

So they left you to suck up the £275 court fee? You didn't need to sign that. If you had said no and gone to your CCJ hearing of your Application they'd have been ordered to pay your fee back (but not now).

Show us the WS & evidence you sent.

You've already been kindly given a link to the one somebody is working on tonight.

InconspicuousSheep21

My initial WS is as follows, this is the only WS I have submitted thus far.

I, XXXXX XXXX, Defendant, residing at XX XXXXXXXX XXXX, XXXXXXXXXX, XXX XXX,

appear as a litigant in person. I affirm the truth of this statement based on my

personal knowledge. I will say as follows:

1.Between 20/06/2022 and 03/07/2023, I was employed at XXX XXXX

XXXXXXXXX, XXXX X, XXXX XXXX Retail Park, XXXXXXX, XXX XXX. (Exhibit XX1:

Proof of employment).

2. I was informed by the management of the possibility of Parking Charge

Notices (PCNs) being issued. However, upon receipt of such notices, I promptly

notified my employer, who stated in-person they would be dealt with. (Exhibit

XX2: Screenshot confirming employer notification dated 11/07/2022).

3. No further correspondence from UKPC (Claimant) was received.

4. My tenancy at XX XXXXXXX XXXXX, XXXXXXX, XXX XXX, ended on 08/08/2022.

(Exhibit XX3: Tenancy agreement – XX XXXXXXX XXXXX, XXXXXXX, XXX XXX).

5. Due to being a student at the XXXXXXXXXX XX XXXX XXXXXX undertaking a BSc

(Hons) XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX, I had no fixed abode and moved to my home

address in XXXXXXXXXX in the interim.

6. I relocated to a new student residence at X XXXXXXXXX XXXX, XXXXXXX, XXX

XXX on 24/08/2022. (Exhibit KK4: Tenancy agreement – X XXXXXXXXX XXXX, XXXXXXX, XXX

XXX).

7. Consequently, the Letter of Claim and subsequent court documents were

sent to my former address at XX XXXXXXX XXXXX, XXXXXXX, XXX XXX, where I no

longer lived.

8. My Assured Shorthold Tenancy (AST) agreements specify my residency

periods at both the previous and the address to which I moved relevant to this

claim. This demonstrates contact attempts made at XX XXXXXXX XXXXX, XXXXXXX, XXX XXX, were futile due to me no longer being a resident at the address

mentioned above.

9. I promptly updated my address with my employer and submitted my address

change to DVLA, updating my V5C vehicle registration document shortly after

relocating. (Exhibit XX5: V5C document dated 13/09/2022).

10. My awareness of court proceedings began when I reviewed my credit score

and subsequently contacted the Civil National Business Centre (CNBC) on

19/12/2023, discovering a County Court Judgment (CCJ) against me dated

30/05/2023. (Exhibit XX6: Email correspondence from the CNBC 19/12/2023).

11. My local Member of Parliament (MP) intervened to assist in contacting UKPC

(Claimant) on my behalf, as attempts made by me to contact the Claimant were

unsuccessful. The MP's office informed me that UKPC indicated an agent had

visited XX XXXXXXX XXXXX, XXXXXXX, XXX XXX on 19/07/2023 after I had relocated

on 08/08/20222, but it "appeared vacant". (Exhibit XX6: Correspondence from

local MP dated 26/02/2024).

12. My employment records confirm my presence on the Land during the dates

in question, where I was engaged in work-related duties. (Exhibit XX7: Work

schedule verifying work-related duties).

13. On 04/07/2024, I received an email from my employer confirming my

entitlement, as an employee, to park on the Land managed by the Claimant.

This correspondence clarified the permissions relevant to the alleged parking

contraventions. (Exhibit XX8: Email dated 04/07/2024 from employer).

14. I respectfully request the Court to strike out the claim entered against me on

30 May 2023 and grant any further relief deemed just and proper by the Court.

I confirm the truth of the facts stated in this witness statement. I understand

that making false statements in a document verified by a statement of truth may

lead to proceedings for contempt of Court.

This is where I went wrong, I didn't realise up until reading the forums the defence statement and witness statement I submitted were in relation to the CCJ rather than the PCNs alone.

InconspicuousSheep21

Just to add to the above, from the impression I'm getting the WS is meant to be in relation to/supplement the defence statement I've already served and filed (I don't believe I can submit another defence at this stage). So I'm unsure if drafting an entirely new WS would stand in court. 

InconspicuousSheep21

Furthermore, I did not pay the N244 fee. That was covered by HWF thankfully at the time due to having low income.

Coupon-mad

InconspicuousSheep21 said:

Furthermore, I did not pay the N244 fee. That was covered by HWF thankfully at the time due to having low income.

Oh I am soooo happy to hear that! Teehee!

So you aren't out of pocket - good.  Sorry if it sounded like I was criticising you. Not intended. That was what had upset me (I thought DCB had caused you to waste a hefty court fee that the Judge would have likely made them pay you back).

Your WS is quite good as it includes evidence of your right to park as an employee. Presumably it says you were not restricted to some 2 hour limit and were exempt?

I think you have done pretty well.

Due to the amount at stake I think this will go to the hearing. Maybe. But DCB do not like hearings so you never know!

What does the C's WS say about your right to park? Does it pretend you had no right to exceed 2 hours or something?

InconspicuousSheep21

Haha, that makes two of us! I did not take it at criticism don't you worry! I just do a poor job at explaining things (as you might've noticed). Probably why I've ended up in this tom foolery predicament to begin with

You've quite rightly stated they've pretended I've not mentioned being an employee in the entirety of the statement since the car park was for "customers only" with a "maximum stay of 3 hours". I've created a dropbox link with the claimants witness statement enclosed.

hxxps://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/we4t5x0ara8yzjy0da9jb/AHtnj47A3DsCfBrjR0wlJ4M?rlkey=njonxw9tx1ldghqwihxa3u7b8&st=x5h0g09s&dl=0

The email evidence from the current manager of the store I worked at is retrospective since at the time I was only given verbal permission by the manager at the time who interviewed me so cannot prove it was given at the time. However, the retail park itself contains various shops - the employees of which park in the same car park. The contents of the email have been copied and pasted below.

...

To whom this may concern, 

I hope this email finds you well! 

I had a query regarding parking at XXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXX, XXXX X, XXXX XXXX Retail Park, XXXXXXX, XXX XXX. As an ex-employee between the dates 20/06/2022 and 03/07/2023. Was I permitted to park in the car park regulated by UK Parking Control Limited exceeding the maximum stay for customers? I was informed at the time of my employment by XXX that employees were permitted to park on the Land, however, wanted some clarification on this matter. 

I look forward to hearing from you!

Kind regards,

XXXXX XXXX

...

Dear XXXXX 

Yes all staff working for XXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXX at XXXX XXXX retail park are permitted to park free of charge however long your shift may entail for that day/evening. If there is anything else I can help with in regards to this matter please don't hesitate to get in touch.

Kind regards XXXXX XXXXXX

Store Manager

XXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXX XXXX

...

I am still struggling to find a witness statement template on this forum as a lot of the stuff I've seen is in relation to defence statements, that stage has come and gone for me

KeithP

InconspicuousSheep21 said:

I am still struggling to find a witness statement template on this forum...

There is no 'template' as such, but there are several examples linked from the second post of the NEWBIES thread following these words...

InconspicuousSheep21

Perfect, I'll try having a look now. Thank you!

Coupon-mad

InconspicuousSheep21 said:

Perfect, I'll try having a look now. Thank you!

I don't think you need it. Don't bombard the Judge with stuff. They don't like it!

If you have already put in that WS you showed us, then your main silver bullet (already in evidence) is that you worked there and were not subject to the time limit that applied to customers only.

The email evidence from the current manager of the store I worked at is retrospective since at the time I was only given verbal permission by the manager at the time who interviewed me so cannot prove it was given at the time. 

You don't have to prove it. You'd be surprised!

If this hearing proceeds, YOU will be the only 'witness' there and your oral account of the promise made at your interview forms part of your evidence. That holds weight.

All the C has done is state what the terms were for customers but you were not a customer and always had an exemption to the 'customer' terms.  If the Claimant's allowed/staff vehicle 'whitelist' electronic exemption system failed, that was their fault and not any conduct of yours.

You were never in breach. You - quite reasonably - relied on your staff (verbal) alternative contract which you have retrospectively proved with those emails.

I say you are ready for the hearing.  Maybe DCB Legal will discontinue anyway.  Worth a call to the court a few days before.