DCB Legal Claim

greenhowgiggle

Thank you @Coupon-mad, there seem to be a lot of potential flaws with the signage here! I will do some reading into the regulations and begin drafting a defence based on your observations.

DBC must hate Google Streetview!

LDast

Personally, and others will disagree, I would submit this very short defence that covers the "reason" and highlights the Claimants failures. Only needs the claimant name, your name, the claim number and signing by typing your name and date. Also include a draft order that needs no editing.

IN THE COUNTY COURT

Claim No: [Claim Number]

BETWEEN:

[Claimant's Full Name]
Claimant

- and -

[Defendant's Full Name]
Defendant

________________________________________________________________________

DEFENCE

1. The Defendant denies any liability for this claim.

2. There is a lack of precise detail in the Particulars of Claim (PoC) in respect of the factual and legal allegations made against the Defendant such that the PoC do not comply with CPR 16.4.

3. The Defendant is unable to plead properly to the PoC because: 

(a)The reason stated in the PoC is not factually correct. There was no defined “no stopping zone”;(b)The contract referred to is not detailed or attached to the PoC in accordance with CPR PD 16.7.5;(c)The PoC do not state the exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the terms and conditions of the contract (or contracts) which is/are relied on;(d)The PoC do not set out the reason (or reasons) why the claimant asserts the defendant has breached the contract (or contracts);(e)The PoC do not state with sufficient particularity exactly where the breach occurred, the exact time when the breach occurred and how long it is alleged that the vehicle was parked before the parking charge was allegedly incurred;(f)The PoC do not state exactly how the claim for statutory interest is calculated;(g)The PoC do not state what proportion of the claim is the parking charge and what proportion is damages;(h)The PoC states that the Claimant is suing the defendant as the driver or the keeper. The claimant obviously knows whether the defendant is being sued as the driver or the keeper and should not be permitted to plead alternative causes of action. 

4. The Defendant has attached to this defence a copy of an order made at another court which the allocating judge ought to make at this stage so that the Defendant can then know and understand the case which they face and can then respond properly to the claim.

Statement of truth

I believe that the facts stated in this Defence are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

Signed:

Date:

And the Draft Order:

Of the Court's own initiative and upon reading the Particulars of Claim and the defence

AND the court being of the view that there is a lack of precise detail in the Particulars of Claim in respect of the factual and legal allegations made against the Defendant such that the Particulars of Claim do not comply with CPR 16.4.

It is Ordered that:

1. Unless the Claimant do, within 14 days of service of this order, file and serve at court a further Particulars of Claim supported by a statement of truth which complies with CPR 16.4 and which sets out:

• (i) the precise and concise factual allegations it makes against the Defendant and

• (ii) the factual or legal [or both] basis of its claim and

• (iii) the evidence relied on that the Defendant was the driver;

• (iv) the evidence relied on that all the requirements of PoFA 14(2)(a) were complied with; and

• (v) exactly how its claim is calculated (if there is a claim for a fixed sum)

then the claim shall be struck out.

2. For the avoidance of doubt the further Particulars of Claim must:

• (a) refer to and have attached to them (clearly marked "A") a copy of the contract (or contracts) between the claimant and defendant relied on

• (b) set out the exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the terms and conditions of the contract (or contracts) which is (or are) relied on.

• (c) have attached to them (clearly marked "B") a copy of each of the PCNs which forms the basis of this claim.

• (d) must state by what method each of the PCNs was first brought to the attention of the defendant. For example, attaching it to the defendant's vehicle.

• (e) in respect of each alleged breach of contract, set out the reason (or reasons) why the claimant asserts that the defendant was in breach of contract.

• (f) in respect of each alleged breach of contract, set out (i) the full postal address of where the breach took place and (ii) the precise date and time of the alleged breach and (iii) exactly how long it is alleged that the vehicle was parked before the parking charge was incurred.

• (g) in respect of each alleged breach of contract, must state whether the defendant is sued as the driver of the vehicle or the keeper or the hirer of the vehicle.

• (h) not plead that the defendant is sued in the alternative as the driver of the vehicle or as the keeper of the vehicle.

• (i) state clearly whether the claim is brought under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, and specify whether the defendant is pursued as the hirer or keeper of the vehicle.

• (j) If the defendant is pursued as the hirer, the claimant must provide evidence of compliance with PoFA, including copies of the Notice to Hirer, the Notice to Keeper, and the relevant documents mandated in PoFA paragraph 14(2)(a).

• (k) must explain the factual or legal (or both) basis of the claim for damages.

• (l) set out a precise calculation of the claim for statutory interest up to the date of issue to include the date interest started running.

3. Permission to either party to apply to set aside, vary or stay this order by an application on notice which must be filed at this Court no more than 5 days after service of this order, failing which no such application may be made.

If it ever gets far enough to need a WS, the "hook" is in there.

Coupon-mad

greenhowgiggle said:

Thank you @Coupon-mad, there seem to be a lot of potential flaws with the signage here! I will do some reading into the regulations and begin drafting a defence based on your observations.

DBC must hate Google Streetview!

You need to tell us which PPC please.

greenhowgiggle

@Coupon-mad the PPC is Baysentry Solutions - Home | BaySentry Solutions - PCN

greenhowgiggle

Thanks so much @LDast - I've read through the relevant directions and regulations just to understand what the defence is referring to and that all appears to make sense. 

Should the draft order be appended to the same document/attachment as the defence? Or should it be a separate document?

LDast

greenhowgiggle said:

Should the draft order be appended to the same document/attachment as the defence? Or should it be a separate document?

The Draft Order is a separate PDF file that is sent together with the defence at attachments to an email addressed to claimresponses.cnbc@justice.gov.uk and you CC in yourself.

greenhowgiggle

LDast said:

greenhowgiggle said:

Should the draft order be appended to the same document/attachment as the defence? Or should it be a separate document?

The Draft Order is a separate PDF file that is sent together with the defence at attachments to an email addressed to claimresponses.cnbc@justice.gov.uk and you CC in yourself.

Excellent, thank you. I've included on the draft order the same heading as appears at the top of the defence (substituting "Draft Order" for "Defence") and will submit everything today

LDast

It either gets struck out or they discontinue.

greenhowgiggle

It seems like DBC Legal want to fight this one....



Their evidence comprises of what looks like Google streetview images of the signage.

I suppose I'll have to compile my own list of counter evidence now :-(

I can see why people give up and pay the fine - all this work is hardly worth £200 of my time!

LDast

Whilst we all agree that it is not worth £xxx of anybody's time, do you think it is worth funding the scammers by rewarding them and therefore encouraging them to continue abusing the legal process?