Driver doesn't want to pay Horizon fine, but registered keeper does...

Car1980

You can ask for them to provide that within your witness statement. 

ie. in your paragraph about the machine you can finish with something like "If the Claimant disagrees with my assertions they should provide a full, unredacted log of that day's transactions in chronological order."

(they've been known to provide logs in alphabetical or VRM order to hide gaps, so demand it is chronological)

Coupon-mad

I'm confused. That wasn't the OP.

Le_Kirk

LimeStar said:

Just made a start on witness statement and I'm wondering, is it too late to request they provide evidence of the transactions at the pay machine on the day in question?  Given that the machine was broken i thought it might help. If its worthwhile, should I request it from the parking company or the solicitors?

Did you mean to post on our own thread: -
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6543122/bank-parking-park-management-dcb-legal#latest

andromeda24

Small update: I received multiple of the DRP letters over the course of the year, all of which I ignored. Those stopped in June and I haven’t heard anything since. Is there anything else to expect now? 

Gr1pr

After the debt collectors letters stop, within the 6 year window the following could happen 

A Letter of Claim giving you 30 days notice to respond,  typically from a bulk litigation company like DCB Legal,  Moorside Legal,  B W Legal or Gladstones 

Followed by 

An N1SDT court claim pack from the CNBC in Northampton using MCOL to arrive in the post in the name of the defendant,  a Money Claim 

andromeda24

Gr1pr said:

After the debt collectors letters stop, within the 6 year window the following could happen 

A Letter of Claim giving you 30 days notice to respond,  typically from a bulk litigation company like DCB Legal,  Moorside Legal,  B W Legal or Gladstones 

Followed by 

An N1SDT court claim pack from the CNBC in Northampton using MCOL to arrive in the post in the name of the defendant,  a Money Claim 

Anecdotally, have there been other cases of people going long periods of time inbetween contact then randomly receiving LBCs? 

Gr1pr

Yes, tens of thousands,  or probably a lot more 

There are 676 in the following thread alone, that is only about one bulk litigator, DCB LEGAL 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6377263/dcb-legal-record-of-private-parking-court-claim-discontinuations/p1

So thousands on here involving various companies,  be it in house claims like CEL or Parking Eye or SIP for example, or via bulk litigation companies on behalf of nearly 200 private parking companies 

The Limitations Act 1980, puts your deadline in another 5 years,  2030, so keep your paperwork and evidence safe 

Coupon-mad

andromeda24 said:

Gr1pr said:

After the debt collectors letters stop, within the 6 year window the following could happen 

A Letter of Claim giving you 30 days notice to respond,  typically from a bulk litigation company like DCB Legal,  Moorside Legal,  B W Legal or Gladstones 

Followed by 

An N1SDT court claim pack from the CNBC in Northampton using MCOL to arrive in the post in the name of the defendant,  a Money Claim 

Anecdotally, have there been other cases of people going long periods of time in between contact then randomly receiving LBCs? 

All the time. It's normal, so keep your address updated if you move because you cannot risk missing the real letters.

You've run the gamut of the DR Plus letters so - after a lull - your data will later be passed to another bunch of greedy chancers, lining up to have a go at you and see if their red threatograms work.

andromeda24

Welp, LBC received from Gladstones - dated Christmas Eve no less. Merry Christmas to me!! 

Drafted up the below response using the newbies thread post. WDYT? 

To whom it may concern, 

I write in response to your Letter of Claim.

Please note that my current address for service is set out below. 

[Address]

For the avoidance of doubt, the alleged ‘debt’ is disputed and the driver has not been identified.

As set out in the appeals process with your client, the Notice to Keeper is non-compliant with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. In particular, the Notice incorrectly states the commencement of the 28-day period for the transfer of liability, contrary to paragraphs 9(2)(f) and 9(6). 

In the absence of a compliant Notice to Keeper, your client has no lawful basis to pursue this claim. Litigation in these circumstances is completely pointless, and any court proceedings will be rigorously defended. 

An application for legal and administrative costs will also be pursued on the basis that your client was given clear evidence that the claim had no hope of success and yet still proceeded.

Yours faithfully,

[Name]

Coupon-mad

Yep all good.