No real defence - DCB Legal Ltd and Euro Car Parks

icbatbh

Hi all,

I've received the Letter of Claim issued by DCB Legal Ltd acting for Euro Car Parks. The PCN dates back to 2022 and they claim my vehicle was parked longer than the maximum period allowed in a retail car park.

I've spent time reading DCB Legal Ltd Euro Car Parks threads here and know that I need to reply with the template shown on the Newbies thread.

The problem is I have no "real" reason for disputing the claim other than the fact that it's bang out of order that I have to pay £170 for overstaying in a car park for which there would have been no charge anyway had I stayed for less than 2 hours.

As per the Newbie thread I have called the retailers based at the retail park and complained but they have all said the same thing, that they don't deal with the car park it's managed by an external company (Euro Car Parks).

So my question is should I put any reasons for disputing the claim in the letter, or leave them out? DCB Legal Ltd are going to know that it's a template letter from here as they will have seen it many times before so I expect they will try to persue this one confident that they will win.

Thank you

Gr1pr

Its a £100 PCN that arose, not £170 , the added £70 is a spurious debt collectors charge, wont be in any decision by a court, if it gets that far ( a typical loss in court is about £212. )

So its £100 for overstaying on a free to park car park, even the Beavis case was £85 at the time 

The template defence is what you will be using as your future defence 

Do not add anything to the template response 

DCB Legal will do what their client is paying them to do 

Coupon-mad

It doesn't matter if there's a weak defence!

Honestly does not matter.

But OF COURSE you must add some basic detail about the car park and event in paragraph 3.  I do say this in the Template Defence and I even coach people there, what to say.  This is sooo easy.

DCB Legal will discontinue anyway in 2025.

icbatbh

Thank you both for your prompt replies. 

Just to clarify @Coupon-mad, when you say 'paragraph 3', do you mean when it actually comes to writing my defence at a later date, and not on t@Coupon-mad response to the Letter of Claim? If that's the case then I won't add anything to the tepmplate response as per Gr1pr's advice.

LDast

Don't overthink the LoC response. just use it as is. No need for any editing of it.

icbatbh

Okay thanks for the clarification

icbatbh

Hi again,

I have received an email from DCB Legal Ltd in response to my LoC response, which says the following:

1. The sum added is a contribution to the actual costs incurred by our Client as a result of your non-payment.
2. The HMRC ‘VAT Supply and Consideration manual’ (VATSC06140), which was last updated on 02 September 2020, confirmed that PCNs fall out of the scope of VAT.  
3. As per my request my file will remain on hold for 30 days from the date of their email, after which payment of the outstanding balance of £170 will be due. Failure to make payment will result in a Claim being issued against you without any further reference. 

I expect it's a bad idea to reply to this email as I cannot find anything on the MSE forum that says I should. One thing of note from point 1 above is that there was no 'non-payment' from me. It's a retail car park that is free for a period of time - there is no option to pay to stay longer otherwise I would have done so.

As per the newbies thread I have contacted the managers of the stores in this retail park and they have all said the exact same thing - that they cannot help as the car park is managed externally (by ECP). 

So tl;dr am I simply waiting for a court claim to arrive via post?

Thanks

Gr1pr

Report them to the inland revenue with vat concerns 

Then sit and wait for the claim form pack to arrive in the post from the CNBC in Northampton using MCOL

Same advice as everyone else has had 

Coupon-mad

Search the forum for:

HMRC VAT concerns

...and do that report for the greater good, like everyone who got that exact same reply.

icbatbh

Hi again everyone,

Just like clockwork the Claim Form has arrived, dated 10th December. 

I have completed the AOS on MCOL thanks to the excellent guide on the Newbies thread.

I am now using the draft defence template, and the title of my thread is still relevant - I don't have one!

The breach is stated in the Particulars of Claim on the form:

"The defendant is pursued as the driver of the vehicle for breach of the terms on the signs (the contract). reason: Your Vehicle Was Parked Longer Than The Maximum Period Allowed". 

I can't really deny the above facts. However, underneath the above point it states:

"AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS
1. £170 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 £.04 until judgment or sooner payment.
3. Costs and court fees

It is these points that I take issue with - how I am being asked to pay £170 for the PCN and damages, when there was no fee to pay at the car park in the first place. Is it okay to put this as my main response to paragraph 3, or do I need to give them details of why the car was parked there, etc?

Thanks for taking the time to read

Coupon-mad

Here you go:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6576011/cel-dcb-legal-pcn-cnbc-claim-defence-assistance-required-please

That's a new standard para 3 especially for DCB Legal cases. Easy, innit?!