DCB LEGAL court claim 2025 - UKPC – Parkhouse Court - Hatfield - Draft Defence.

Castle

maddiction said:

I haven't got the paperwork in front of me, thus only have the redacted pcn's to hand reading back my own thread: It will be the 15:39 one, as that had the windscreen ticket, they are still persuing. (The postal NTK was the one cancelled ).

This is where it gets confusing because the PCN issued at 15.34 has the picture of the windscreen ticket on it, but you're saying that this picture was actually taken after 15.39.

maddiction

By 'shows' and 'does not show' the windscreen ticket I had been referring to the picture shown on the NTK letters (to differentiate them).

The NTK with the time of 15:34 and showing the picture on it with the windscreen pCN, was the pCN that was cancelled.

Both sets of evidence pictures show the one single windscreen ticket, in exactly the same place (and both also show the same 'Free parking ticket' that they allege had expired), I would expect the second pCN evidence to show two windscreen tickets (or one if the first was only postal)  and the first, if only postal, to show non....

However this windscreen pCN was marked as issued at 15:38 AFTER the time on the first NTK (15:34) which shows a windscreen ticket in the 'star picture' on the front of it (/the letter), the second NTK says 15:39 (which differs slightly from the pCN @ 15:38). 

So yes I am saying that the first PCN, which (was cancelled) shows the pCN windscreen ticket that was issued at 15:38, despite the NTK detailing 15:34 as the time.   as there was only one windscreen ticket on the vehicle (even their evidence shows that...).

I'm hoping this is good evidence of how crocked they are.... and will at the very least call in to question how accurate their time stamps are.

maddiction

MCOL AOS done.


Also, trying to get info from the DVLA: Asking if UKPC submitted to requests for register keeper details.

The person I talked to on the webchat seemed particularly clueless (didn't sound like they understood what I was asking them) and sent me a V888 form, which doesn't look to me like the correct form, having looked further, do actually need: MIS1065 - Personal Data Subject access request (SAR) form, to do this?

Thanks.

edited: Changed driver details to registered keeper details ( as per Gr1pr corrected my error for me below).

Gr1pr

UKPC ( nor any other private parking company   ) can ask for driver details,  they can only obtain Registered Keeper details 

The dvla respond within 30 days by post once the query has been received 

Umkomaas has regularly posted the details here on how to submit a request by email to the dvla, not by phoning them 

maddiction

DVLA have responded promptly to my SAR request:  Two requests were made for the keeper details (on the same day).

UKPC have responded asking for Photo ID and Proof of address.

Having read the ICO website I can't see that they need photo ID (i'm assuming that is a fishing exercise on there part to gain more information).  Surly if they are confident enough to peruse me for breach of contract AND go as far as starting legal proceedings then they should be confident enough that I am who I say I am ( I have obviously put my name, address and car reg. in the SAR letter )? Am I right in thinking this and a short to the point reply stating this should be sufficient to get them to action the SAR ?  Is providing proof of address (i.e. a recent utility bill) necessary?

Parking event: 7/9/2024

1 windscreen ticket: 7/9/2024

2 NTK's: 10/10/2024 (one for the windscreen ticket, one just postal)

Keeper Details Requested from DVLA: 9/10/2024

Thanks.

maddiction

I see the template has changed recently and the defence needs to be kept quite short now and be submitted via the MCOL portal.


My first (cut down) draft (edited v2.1), appreciate any comments / advice etc

--

P.2:

Further the NTK received fails to fully comply with Schedule 4 of the POFA (2012) and is therefore not valid for the purpose of holding the Registered Keeper liable.

( last line of the template of P.2 moved to first line of P.3 )

P.3:

The Defendant has little recollection of events, save as set

out below and to admit that they were the registered keeper.

However, it is not clear from the POC if the Defendant has been

pursued as keeper or driver.

A ‘free’ 1hr ticket was obtained from one of the machines on site,

however this did not require agreeing to any T&C before been

issued by the machine.  The defendant believes the occupants

returned to the vehicle on or around the expiry time of the

ticket, and certainly within any reasonable grace period(s).

The Defendant denies the alleged debt & questions the validity of

the evidence provided & the operators integrity; based on a second

PCN issued some 5 minutes before (for the same parking event and

sent via postal NTK only) yet showing the EXACT same windscreen

ticket (supposedly issued some 5 minutes later): PCN:

xxxxxxxxxx.

Signage across the whole site was poor and not suitable for the

formation of a contract.

The Defendant will ask the court to consider relevant health

conditions with reference to The Equality Act 2010 and the

Consumer Rights Act 2015.

The Claimant is asking the Defendant for photo ID in relation to a

data SAR, however if the Claimant is not reasonably sure of the

Defendants standing, how can they have proceeded with this claim

AND satisfied the courts pre-action CPR’s?

--

(Typos hopefully fixed).

Thanks

Coupon-mad

Possibly slightly too long but you can test it yourself, by trying to 'save' the defence in MCOL.

Do not forget to SUBMIT when happy with it!

maddiction

Thanks Coupon-mad.  

To double check P.10 is the one to remove if I need to, to make my case specific text fit?

Gr1pr

Fix any typos like clamant & clam

P10 can be removed or adapted if necessary 

If I were issuing a SAR,  I wouldn't be using my driving licence because the date of birth is in it, nevermind the picture   ( plus some people don't have a photocard licence,  last year mine was pink  )

I would not use a passport for the fact that too much personal information is on it too, these 2 forms of I D are valuable 

From me they would get 2 recent suitably redacted utility bills or bank statements or council letters etc, plus an unredacted copy of my V5c log book,  plus copies of anything they sent me like an NTK PCN letter etc

No pictures,  no date of birth,  no passport number or DL number 

maddiction

Thanks Gr1pr

Typos hopefully fixed (draft above updated).

All looks like it fits MCOL with 3 lines to spare (without needing to remove p.10).

I'm assuming I don't need to sign the bottom of the defence text and that's done via the MCOL further on in the submission process?

With regards the SAR:  Having read the guidelines I can't see any reason they should be asking for photo ID ( and they have no idea what I look like, so what use would it be....), beyond stalling and/or a fishing trip for more information.  imo they really should be confident they are sending to the right person as they keep writing to me demanding money and have now initiated court proceedings ( name, address and reg been the same on both.....).

Am I better leaving it be for now as I am trying to use that as part of my defence, or should I respond to their request for more details (I certainly wont be sending them photo id..) explaining they know who I am and if they are unsure then cease and desist any and all actions until they are satisfied who I am (and I certainly will not be helping them with that)?

Thanks,

m