CNBC - DCB Legal \ Euro Car Parks

Quinny1999

I have been reading the newbies site and I am still unsure how to play this one.

Basically in 2021 I drove in to a car park, spent about 10-15 minutes in there and left as there was a car park where I was heading so didn't actually need to park. I have had all the letters and just ignored them.

I received the CNBC Claim Form issued 28th August and today have filed the AOS.

What I am unsure of is how to best defend it. The car is a company vehicle so should I just go with the appeal that doesn't say who's driving, or do I need more than that at this stage?

The other thing I noticed when I did a subject access request to Euro Car Parks, was that the picture of the reg as I was leaving the car park was not even visible, and that the rear reg plate picture they provided appeared to be tampered as if they had doc't the image to make if look like FP70 when in fact it looks like FB70 with the bottom of the B smudge out.

Any advice on how to proceed would be appreciated.

KeithP

I think that the last picture of the front number plate clearly shows it as FP70 but with a fixing screw/bolt 'enhancing' things somewhat.

Quinny1999 said:

I received the CNBC Claim Form issued 28th August and today have filed the AOS.

With a Claim Issue Date of 28th August, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 30th September 2024 to file a Defence.
That's over three 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 at the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Don't miss the deadline for filing a Defence.

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

Coupon-mad

Just use the Template Defence as you see in all the other DCB Legal / Euro Car Parks claims at the moment.  They are litigating a huge batch. We have 2 or 3 exact match threads like yours each day, so go back and scroll through the forum to read a good half dozen or more. Learn how people worded their paragraph 3. Copy!

Quinny1999

Yeah fair point KeithP, it does look like the fixing screw cap that has made it look off.

So in terms of a defence, I just copy the 30 points in to an email and then just edited paragraph 3 in my own words?

With it being a company vehicle, would I have only used the appeal for no knowledge of who was driving when I got the LBC letter? No need to use that now?

Gr1pr

No you don't copy it into an email, but a word document will suffice, altering paragraph 3 and possibly 2 too

When completed, save as a PDF and attach it to the submission email etc, following the instructions for correct submission ( so not on MCOL, and no postal either. )

Either you do know who was driving, or you don't, or you cannot remember, so think about it carefully 

Coupon-mad

It's a formal court submission that needs signing and dating under a statement of truth and saving as a PDF.  Such a statement can't just be words in the body of an email.

KeithP

Quinny1999 said:

So in terms of a defence, I just copy the 30 points in to an email and then just edited paragraph 3 in my own words?

You appear to have skipped the opening post on the Template Defence thread and gone straight to the second post.

That's not the best tactic.

Quinny1999

My apologies I had read the first 12 steps but was focusing more on what I need my defence to be, I will be sure to print, sign and send in as a .pdf.

I drove in to the car park, walked to the machine, didn't have any cash and the app would not download due to a bad signal. So I drove out in just over 15 mins in total.

Coupon-mad

That's OK as long as your para 3 makes it clear that you only spent the minutes it took to do all that, and most of the wasted minutes were due to their useless app (explain the issue).  Thus the alleged contract was frustrated and impossible to perform, so the Defendant left without accepting the parking terms or gaining any amenity from the site.

Quinny1999

On the top of the letter, am I correct in that you put the claimant details from the CNBC under claimant, and my details from the CNBC under the defendant? Sounds pretty obvious that this is what I should do but want to make sure the format is correct.

Does this defence also read ok, any recommended changes?

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 drove in to the Greengate Car Park in Manchester on the 30/11/2021 at around 17:46. The defendant proceeded to the machine in order to pay for parking, as it was dark and dimly lit it was very difficult to make out the signage and follow the instructions which therefore took longer than usual. 

3.1 In order to attempt to pay for parking the defendant proceeded to try and download the RingGo App, the defendant also tried to download the PayByPhone App, however due to a poor signal strength both Apps were slow to completely download. Once downloaded it was difficult to use the Apps and confirm the parking session so the defendant gave up. 

3.2 Thus the alleged contract was frustrated and impossible to perform, so the Defendant left without accepting the parking terms or gaining any amenity from the site.

Le_Kirk

You need to add paragraph numbers!