DCB Legal Claim

Coupon-mad

Coupon-mad said:

LOL!  

They reckon THIS is a properly signed 'No stopping zone'?!

- There's a Council sign on the left and on the right, beside some double yellows.

- There's nothing clear or obvious to tell a driver you've crossed a boundary onto privately managed land, once past those Council signs on the public highway.

- There is a pale green / white 'P' (entrance) sign buried in a bush on the right, not facing the road. Drivers can't see that even in daylight, without looking away from the road ahead. It's not compliant with the Code of Practice.

- There's no lighting above the green signs in the bush. And as they are at right angles to the road there is no way they'd be lit up by approaching headlights either.

- None of the signs are 'repeater' signs facing oncoming drivers.

- None of the signs have £100 visible AT ALL so the driver cannot have had a fair opportunity to read terms and accept a £100 risk BEFORE STOPPING (in moving traffic).

- There are no double red lines.

- There is no attempt to mark this approach road out as if it is a sort of pseudo 'clearway'.

- There are absolutely no 'safety' excuses here.  No justification whatsoever for this little area to be a no-stopping zone as opposed to normal contractual parking terms.

Just to remind you at WS stage to use this GSV evidence because this is NOT a 'no stopping zone' in any way, shape or form.

Gr1pr

greenhowgiggle said:

Gr1pr said:

DCBL being the debt collectors, not DCB Legal the legal team 

Ignore DCBL, don't ignore DCB Legal 

No bailiffs are instructed in any of these cases 

Thanks @Gr1pr I'm ignoring DCBL for now - interesting that they have the word Bailiffs in their company name when they're not bailiffs...

Who says they're not. ?  ( I presume that you have seen their TV programme, when they have a court order. ?  )

Read the bottom of the letter, where it says this is not subject to bailiff action, hence its only a debt collector letter, not a bailiff action letter 

Its a company that wears various hats 

Coupon-mad

greenhowgiggle said:

LDast said:

Why do you keep referring to DCB? The claimant is BaySentry Solutions Ltd.

Because the letter was sent by DCB, and says "the evidence we have on file"

Unfortunately, patience has not been rewarded in this case, so my jobs this week will be to complete the N180 questionnaire and travel back to Leeds to take photos of the site for evidence 

What happened?

Please show an image oif rhe NoD that we think DCB Legal sent you when they gave up!  We need to count each evidenced discontinuance.