Claim Form from DCL legal for multiple tickets - Advice needed please

loves2park

Hi Everyone,

Firstly I just want to say thanks to everyone who have put the sticky threads together, they have been super super helpful. I am looking for some advice on a few particulars please.

I'll just give a some of context. Around 7-8 years ago, I received an unfair parking ticket from a private car park before I went travelling. I didn’t open the letters till I returned, by which point I had already received the more threatening letters. I was sent some links by a friend that indicated these companies had no authority, and I didn’t have to pay them, so should just ignore these letters.

To cut a long story short. This led me to have a very lacks attitude to parking, and even though I do try to keep to the allotted times in general, I don’t break a sweat to return if a situation arises causing me to be late. This has led to multiple parking tickets over the years that I have ignored. I.e as soon a I see the return address and white envelope from DCB it goes straight in the bin.

 I realised reading the forum this is totally the wrong attitude, not how someone handles this situation and that I am acutally being part of the problem by doing this. It is not something I will do ever do again so please excuse my stupidity!

I have for the first time received a claims form from civil national business centre county court:

 

 DCL legal on behalf of the client Baysentry solutions.

 

 It was dated the 13 Sept 20424 and I will be submitting an AoS tomorrow. I will include the particulars below:

 

1.    The Defendant (D) is indebted to the Claimant (C) for a Parking Charge(s) issued to vehicle xxxxx at Urban Exchange, Manchester, M4 6DE.
2.    The PCN(s) were issued on 07/02/2023, 11/02/2023, 17/02/2023.
3.    The defendant is pursued as the driver of the vehicle for breach of the terms on the signs (the contract). Reason:Vehicle Overstayed A Free Parking Period.
4.    In the alternative the defendant is pursued as the keeper pursuant to POFA 2012, Schedule 4.

AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS

1.    £510 being the total of the PCN(s) and damages.
2.    Interest at a rate of 8% per annum pursuant to s.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 from the date hereof at a daily rate of £.07 until judgment or sooner payment.
3.    Costs and court fees

 

Total amount being  - £716.04

 

The questions I had were

 

1)        I am concerned that these are only 3 particular times. I am sure there have been a few more. I am assuming that nothing stop DCB Legal from rinse and repeating this strategy with the other 2-4 parking tickets I reckon I have had between now and then? (Ie They can just do this again and again and I will have to do the same process each time.) Is there any way to prevent this?

 

2)        The parking violations are from parking at  Puregym. The gym has a monitor where you type in your license number in to get free parking. Will this affect my defence?

 

3)        The examples I have seen on the forum just include one ticket. Will the fact there are multiple tickets need any adjustment to the standard defence strategy?

 

4)        What’s the worst case scenario if go to court and the judge rules in the favour of DCB (even though I know they almost never go)? Will this affect any future claims DCB can make against me?

 

Sorry for the long read. All help, advice and comments are appreciated!

LDast

As the claim is for multiple PCNs, there is a possibility that they will pursue this all the way to a hearing. It's not guaranteed that they will. Normally, a single PCN claim issued by DCB Legal will in all probability be discontinued before any hearing date. However, for multiple PCNs, there is a much higher possibility that they would continue all the way to a hearing.

One of the defences for the "reason" given in the PoC would be that while the claimant has provided a brief reason for the claim—alleging that the vehicle "overstayed a free parking period"—this does not constitute full compliance with CPR 16.4. The claimant has failed to provide the essential details required by CPR 16.4, including, but not limited to:

1. The specific terms and conditions that were allegedly breached;
2. The exact times and dates of the alleged parking contraventions (the "issue dates" are factually incorrect);
3. How the alleged overstay was measured or recorded (e.g., entry and exit times based on ANPR evidence);
4. The contractual basis on which the claimant relies, as no copy of the alleged contract (the signage or terms) has been attached or referred to in detail, contrary to the requirements of CPR PD 16.7.3–7.5.;
5. How the sums claimed have been calculated and how much is the principal and how much is "damages";
6. How the statutory interest has been calculated and from what date it began to accrue.

As such, the particulars lack sufficient detail to enable the defendant to understand or respond fully to the allegations. 

As for any other claims that may be in the pipeline, you would argue that future claims for additional PCNs at the same location and for the same vehicle might be barred by cause of action estoppel. You would need to establish that the claimant is attempting to bring separate claims for what is essentially the same cause of action. The core argument would be that each alleged contravention arises from a continuous relationship or series of events between the defendant and the claimant, which should have been dealt with as one cause of action.

You would emphasise the practical unfairness and procedural inefficiency of forcing the defendant to deal with multiple claims when they could have all been combined into one.

Coupon-mad

It's good thing that this claim is not for all PCNs because there's still a possibility that DCB Legal might drop it in 2025 even though it's not a single PCN claim.

One by one some or all of these claims might just fall away before hearings and it's well worth defending each one.

Worst case scenario if it goes to a hearing and you lose and are ordered to pay all three charges, is 3 x £100 plus court fees/legal fee as already shown on the claim form, plus £27 hearing fee.  Maybe a little interest.

Much lower than this enhanced claim.

loves2park

LDast said:

As the claim is for multiple PCNs, there is a possibility that they will pursue this all the way to a hearing. It's not guaranteed that they will. Normally, a single PCN claim issued by DCB Legal will in all probability be discontinued before any hearing date. However, for multiple PCNs, there is a much higher possibility that they would continue all the way to a hearing.

One of the defences for the "reason" given in the PoC would be that while the claimant has provided a brief reason for the claim—alleging that the vehicle "overstayed a free parking period"—this does not constitute full compliance with CPR 16.4. The claimant has failed to provide the essential details required by CPR 16.4, including, but not limited to:

1. The specific terms and conditions that were allegedly breached;
2. The exact times and dates of the alleged parking contraventions (the "issue dates" are factually incorrect);
3. How the alleged overstay was measured or recorded (e.g., entry and exit times based on ANPR evidence);
4. The contractual basis on which the claimant relies, as no copy of the alleged contract (the signage or terms) has been attached or referred to in detail, contrary to the requirements of CPR PD 16.7.3–7.5.;
5. How the sums claimed have been calculated and how much is the principal and how much is "damages";
6. How the statutory interest has been calculated and from what date it began to accrue.

As such, the particulars lack sufficient detail to enable the defendant to understand or respond fully to the allegations. 

As for any other claims that may be in the pipeline, you would argue that future claims for additional PCNs at the same location and for the same vehicle might be barred by cause of action estoppel. You would need to establish that the claimant is attempting to bring separate claims for what is essentially the same cause of action. The core argument would be that each alleged contravention arises from a continuous relationship or series of events between the defendant and the claimant, which should have been dealt with as one cause of action.

You would emphasise the practical unfairness and procedural inefficiency of forcing the defendant to deal with multiple claims when they could have all been combined into one.

Thanks so much for, taking the time to write this comprehensive answer    I am planning on using that defence, as I ran this past a friend who is in law tonight and he agrees. Its great to know something like the action estoppel exists and offers me some protection. Hopefully it wont come to that. They also did not send me a LBC, so my friend thinks there may be some defence there on aggressive escalation of claim without sufficient attempts of mediation? Something I will look into futher.

loves2park

Coupon-mad said:

It's good thing that this claim is not for all PCNs because there's still a possibility that DCB Legal night drop it in 2025.  

Worst case scenario if it goes to a hearing and you lose and are ordered to pay all three charges, is 3 x £100 plus court fees/legal fee as already shown on the claim form, plus £27 hearing fee.  Maybe a little interest.

Much lower than this enhanced claim.

Thanks for the reassurance, its much appreciated. I accept responsibility for my actions and if the hearing happens and goes against me, I have to bite the bullet, that is what it is, but at least I know what I am in for now.

loves2park

Just to given an update, incase this is a useful example in the future. I have submitted my AoS online as per the instructions. I am going to prepare my defence over the next week or so ready for the next stage.

KeithP

What is the Issue Date on your Claim Form?

Upon what date did you file an Acknowledgment of Service?
Your MCOL Claim History will have the definitive answer to that.

loves2park

KeithP said:

What is the Issue Date on your Claim Form?

Upon what date did you file an Acknowledgment of Service?
Your MCOL Claim History will have the definitive answer to that.

Hi, thanks for your response. Please see above. Date of service is the 18th of sept. 16th of Oct deadline for defence (i've included all days of the week as im not sure if they operate via "working days"

KeithP

loves2park said:

KeithP said:

What is the Issue Date on your Claim Form?

Upon what date did you file an Acknowledgment of Service?
Your MCOL Claim History will have the definitive answer to that.

Hi, thanks for your response. Please see above. Date of service is the 18th of sept. 16th of Oct deadline for defence (i've included all days of the week as im not sure if they operate via "working days"

You are right with your Defence filing deadline but there might be something useful here...

With a Claim Issue Date of 13th September, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Wednesday 16th October 2024 to file a Defence.

That's 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'.

loves2park

Hi everyone,

I am in the process of finialising my defence and will post a draft soon. My friend who works in law had a question, if anyone has any input that would be great.

" Has anyone sought discontinuance at the defence stage via email/letter by using arguments about the failure to particularise the breaches and for failing to make the case against me know at pre-litigation stage including a failure to engage in mediation in breach of the pre action protocol.

 Has putting pressure on the solicitors early for a discontinuance say with the proviso that if the offer is not accepted in 14 days then I will seek my costs against them at conclusion of the claim or if the claimant discontinues the matter lat a latest stage. 

Does this correspondence ever help or should I just stick to the usual plan?"

LDast

Not in that way. There is a "short" defence with an accompanying draft order for claims that have woefully inadequate Particulars of Claim (PoC). 

If you (or your legally trained friend) are interested, here are links to the two documents:

Short defence

Draft order for the short defence