DCB Legal - Claim form

Bazarius

As this is appears to be , yet contradictory to your first comment above !?, a “double dip “ case  . 

If so , was  this PCN ever appealed or even tried to appeal it to any of the debt collectors ? 

cloudnine_8

I appealed with POPLA and it was unsuccessful  because I could not prove that I had left the car park and as their photographic evidence showed I had never left, I breeched the contract by not registering my vehicle.

Coupon-mad

OK so add to my suggested para 3 that:

The Defendant appealed to try to resolve the dispute but contrary to the usual rules of law, was expected by the industry's self-funded farce of 'POPLA' to be able to prove that the car was elsewhere and that it was two visits, rather than the Claimant shouldering the burden of proof to show from their records, the missing 'orphan images' of the car leaving then later returning.  This was the Claimant's case to prove and they held ANPR image proof all along that this was never a parking event. No permit was required for dropping off a passenger then briefly returning to collect him.

LDast

What has POPLA got to do with the price of eggs in China? You are at claim stage and it matters not one iota that POPLA rejected your appeal.

The only thing that matters is that your defence covers the allegation made in the PoC which is "Failed to obtain a permit in accordance with the notified terms". That is not a concise particular of claim and fails CPR 16.4.

Irrespective of what has been received or appealed earlier, it is incumbent on the Claimant to provide sufficient detail in the PoC to be able to formulate a valid defence. Assume you knew nothing about this PCN and the first thing you know about it is the Claim form. How do you think you could defend such a woefully inadequate claim?

You can't.

Is the contract referred to in the PoC detailed or attached to the PoC in accordance with CPR PD 16.7.5?

Do the PoC state the exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the terms and conditions of the contract which is relied on?

Do the PoC set out the reason (or reasons) why the claimant asserts the defendant has breached the contract?

Do the PoC 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?

Do the PoC state exactly how the claim for statutory interest is calculated?

Do the PoC state what proportion of the claim is the parking charge and what proportion is damages?

Is the Claimant suing the Defendant as the driver or the keeper? The Claimant should not be permitted to plead alternative causes of action without accurately identifying the correct legal status of the Defendant.

If any of those questions cannot be answered from the information provided in the PoC, then the claimant has failed to comply with CPR 16.4 and they should be ordered to provide further particulars of claim or the claim should be struck out.

The fact that it was a double dip shouldn't even come into it at this stage until further PoC are issued and then a proper defence can be formed. If they manage to comply and provide further PoC that contain sufficient particularity, then you should be given an opportunity to submit a proper defence.

cloudnine_8

 Thanks. The PoC is on the previous page and I believe the answer to most of your questions is no. If that is the case who would I approach for a further PoC? DCB Legal ?

Coupon-mad

Please just do the defence I suggested already.

cloudnine_8

Thanks, will do.

Coupon-mad

cloudnine_8 said:

Thanks, will do.

Good. Both parts I suggested.

cloudnine_8

Morning,

I submitted my claim on 16th October.

Do I need to respond to this letter from the claimant's solicitor? Thanks

Gr1pr

The 12 steps in the defence template thread, roughly around step 6 , so halfway through, deals with the interim stages, especially your query above. ( So why are you not referring to them first. ?  )