DCB Legal for ParkingEye members only parking

sporty_parker

I've unfortunately missed Plan A by a good mile and did not do a stellar job with any of the appeals through ParkingEye's processes either so I've now received an HMCTS claim pack. I have completed the acknowledging service of a claim and I'm now following the first 12 steps from the Template Defence thread so I'm preparing an email ready to go. 

The claim lists my vehicle correctly (obviously) and then four separate dates that PCNs were issued on. It pursues me as the driver / keeper of the vehicle and gives the breach as "Reason: Vehicle Remained On Private Property in Breach Of The Prominently Displayed Terms And Conditions." without any further detail.

I have included the additional paragraphs and judgments from @hharry100 on the lack of details of the alleged breach because of the above.

I'd love some thoughts and feedback on my defence below please.

5.  The Defendant was parked at XXXXXX Sports Club, XXXXXX Members Only parking on the xx/xx/2022, the xx/xx/2022 and the xx/xx/2022. The Defendant does not recall being there on yy/yy/2022 and has no diary entry to indicate any reason either he or the vehicle might have been there on that date. The Defendant is currently a social member of XXXXXX Sports Club and has been one continuously since xx/xx/2021. On the dates confirmed above the Defendant was in attendance at the club for sports activities undertaken by his children, namely tennis on the xx/xx/2022 and the xx/xx/2022 and cricket on the xx/xx/2022. The children were at the time members of the Tennis and Cricket Club respectively and there on those dates to participate as members.

Gr1pr

Seems to me that your proposal is like a witness statement, it doesn't really address the POC 

Clearly Parking Eye decided that there was an issue with any authorisation, or lack of, but I appreciate that the alleged breaches are not specified 

KeithP

Hello and welcome.

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.

Can you please show us a picture of the Particulars of Claim - with all your personal detail hidden of course.

sporty_parker

Ironically I write a lot of witness statements and not many replies to POCs @Gr1pr - any tips are much appreciated.

Thanks @KeithP - however I wish I met you folks under better circumstances ;-)

The issue date for the Claim Form is 19 NOV 2024 and I filed the Acknowledgment of Service this afternoon (I realise I shot myself a little in the foot by not waiting the five days)

A claim was issued against you on 19/11/2024Your acknowledgment of service was submitted on 22/11/2024 at 14:40:59Your acknowledgment of service was received on 22/11/2024 at 16:05:07

KeithP

sporty_parker said:

The issue date for the Claim Form is 19 NOV 2024 and I filed the Acknowledgment of Service this afternoon (I realise I shot myself a little in the foot by not waiting the five days)

A claim was issued against you on 19/11/2024

Your acknowledgment of service was submitted on 22/11/2024 at 14:40:59

Your acknowledgment of service was received on 22/11/2024 at 16:05:07

With a Claim Issue Date of 19th November, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service on 22nd November, you have until 4pm on Friday 20th December 2024 to file a Defence.

That's four 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'.


You need to be aware that those Particulars of Claim are totally inadequate.

Particularly this bit...

So it is alleged that the driver 'breached the terms on the signs (the contract)'.

And that allegation is then repeated - 'Reason: Vehicle Remained On Private Property In Breach Of The Prominently Displayed Terms And Conditions'.

Nowhere in those Particulars is there any explanation of what the driver is alleged to have done wrong.

This will be an easy win.

Coupon-mad

Yep.

Might be better to just copy a defence from this month which denies each numbered point from a DCB Legal POC, save for admitting to being the keeper.

You are right to make your facts paragraph 5, with Chan above but you can add CMPS v Akande too! There are 2 appeal cases.

See the defence by @FluffySocks25

Le_Kirk

Coupon-mad said:

You are right to make your facts paragraph 5, with Chan above but you can add CMPS v Akande too! There are 2 appeal cases.

See the defence by @FluffySocks25

See my thread Judgments Link @le_kirk

Umkomaas

Keep to all court requirements and deadlines, and the chances of your case being listed in the following thread are good. 

PE only farm out legal cases to DCB Legal when they have reservations about their own ability to succeed. They have their own team of lawyers in-house who are more than capable of prosecuting a strong case if they had one.  I'm somewhat surprised though as to why they themselves aren't taking this on with four outstanding tickets.  

Are your NtKs PoFA compliant? 

Do they each have a section on the reverse of the PCN headed 'Protection of Freedom Act'?

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

sporty_parker

Coupon-mad said:

Yep.

Might be better to just copy a defence from this month which denies each numbered point from a DCB Legal POC, save for admitting to being the keeper.

You are right to make your facts paragraph 5, with Chan above but you can add CMPS v Akande too! There are 2 appeal cases.

See the defence by @FluffySocks25

Could you point me at the CMPS v Akande inserts to include, I found the text for inclusion but not the scans of the case itself.

Gr1pr

You need the judgments link by LeKirk , as mentioned above 

sporty_parker

Are your NtKs PoFA compliant? 

Do they each have a section on the reverse of the PCN headed 'Protection of Freedom Act'?

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

No idea. I don't have any of the NtKs.