DCB Legal VCS claim

Coupon-mad

Yes and yes. 

PolePosition2

what a day. WS ended up being too large. Only 10 pages but more that 10MB so they emailed me suggesting I print off a hard copy and file it in person which I ended up doing at Sheffield County Court.
They wouldn't take it at the counter but gave me an envelop and said write your name and case number on the front and post it in the wall letterbox just outside the court entrance.

It was my exhibits that pushed me over the limit!!!

I emailed DCBLegal asking them to confirm receipt of my WS which they did.

Now I can relax

Spent literally all of yesterday until 3.30am this morning compiling that thing. My wife said I ought to work for the bar...all I need now is a gown and a wig lol

Is it worth it I was thinking today. It would have been less stressful to have just paid the damn thing but that goes against my principles but I can see why some people would just pay because how would anyone cope not having a printer, a pdf or word application, a smart phone, and the ability to write and understand things is beyond me.

Now to sort my 13" inch monitor HDMI cable and pc to play the dashcam footage and video if the judge allows.

This is going to be interesting

Car1980

"I may not be able to attend the forthcoming hearing. Should this be so, an advocate will attend on my behalf. I ask that the Court accepts this as written notice pursuant to CPR 27.9(I). If I am unable to attend, please decide the claim in my absence, taking into account the advocates submissions, this Statement and any other evidence filed. This paragraph demonstrates my compliance with CPR 27.9(I)(a)-(b).

In the event an advocate does attend the hearing, I request their fee be added to the amount sought."

He's signed a statement of truth. Saying you may not be able to attend when you have absolutely no intention of attempting to or actually attending would be contemptuous.

See https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6625532/vcs-crash-and-burn-at-southampton-county-court-bristol-airport-case/p1

PolePosition2

Having submitted my WS 10 days ago I've since received an email from DCBLEGAL with an attached supplementary WS from JB in response to my WS.

He still ends saying he may not attend but if he doesn't then would his advocates cost be added to the claim if they win 

I have the recent judgement to hand to the judge that states the advocates can't be used as legal representation since they are not solicitors.

Five days to the hearing so not given me much time to respond to his supplementary evidence WS.

He even said this....

"Defendant refers to their attempts to cancel the Parking Charge with third parties to the Contract.

With respect, third parties do not have the authority to cancel the Charge, and this ability remains

solely within the remit of the parking operator, my Company. Moreover, the terms of the Contract,

displayed prominently on the signage supersedes any agreement made by a third party. In any event,

the Defendant had parked in breach of the Conditions for parking. The Defendant has failed to

provide any exempting or mitigating circumstances, and therefore the Charge remains payable"

The third party he refers to is the Landowner!!!!

He's also put me to strict proof that I second appealed through the IPC which they are a member of.

How can VCS not be aware that I appealed to their ADR kangaroo court?

He even mentioned about my request for costs

"Defendant states that they wish to recover their costs, respectfully, the Defendant has not

provided any evidence to suggest that any costs have been incurred. The Defendant’s costs are

denied, and they are put to strict proof of the same. Respectfully, pursuant to CPR 27.14, costs are

not ordinarily applicable to Small Claims. Notwithstanding the above, and without concession, the

Defendant is put to proof that the costs claimed are true"

Is he getting desperate?

ChirpyChicken

The vcs/excel contracts normally give the landowner the right to cancel pcns so he is wrong.

Coupon-mad

I have the recent judgement to hand to the judge that states the advocates can't be used as legal representation since they are not solicitors.

They can't 'conduct litigation' but they can attend hearings; there is an exemption for that. I think we've realised & are agreed that Mazur doesn't apply to the legal rep...

... but you could argue that the Claim Form was signed by an unauthorised person (Sarah Ensall) and DCB Legal is running parking claims as a bulk litigator (over 110,000 boilerplate claim forms per annum, churned by a call centre of unauthorised paralegals and with no chance that one of their handful of actual solicitors is conducting that many cases. And DCB Legal are running this case, still on roll despite JB's own WS.

PolePosition2

I thought you mentioned the new case law and suggested I make three copies and when I walk into the hearing say good morning to the judge and hand a copy of the new case law?

"but in any case did you know you can challenge the entire rights of audience of the legal rep by relying on the brand new case law in Mazurs and possibly even stop them from being allowed to speak, if you take the judge to that new case law & they read it?

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81663895/#Comment_81663895

I think JB should be OK ... not 100% sure though...  is he a CILEX Fellow without independent practising rights or does it not matter because he's an employee of the Claimant"?

"The rep who turns up - even if they are a barrister - is likely to be on dodgy ground (no practising certificate?) and you can raise all this as a preliminary matter at the hearing"

"Others may assist but they cannot themselves perform reserved activities" 

Coupon would you know what the reserved activities are by any chance?

"can an unqualified employee — such as a paralegal, litigation executive, trainee, or CILEX Fellow without independent practice rights — conduct litigation under the supervision of a solicitor?

Mr Justice Sheldon’s answer was emphatically no. Supervision does not transform an unauthorised employee into an authorised litigator. Only those who personally hold the necessary authorisation, or who fall within a statutory exemption, may conduct litigation. Others may assist, but they cannot themselves perform reserved activities"

"Mr Justice Sheldon ruled that:

• Unauthorised employees may support an authorised litigator.
• They may not themselves conduct litigation, even if closely supervised.
• The correct focus is on who is legally entitled to carry out the reserved activity, not whether the employer is regulated.

The implications are stark. Litigation steps such as issuing claims, filing pleadings, certifying service, and signing consent orders must now be performed only by authorised individuals. Assistants may draft, paginate, bundle, or liaise with clients — but they cannot take procedural steps that commit the client."

......just found this Coupon-mad 

The six reserved legal activities:

1. Conduct of litigation: Issuing proceedings, prosecuting or defending them, and performing other related functions in a court. 

Exercise of a right of audience: Representing clients in court. 

Reserved instrument activities: Preparing legal documents for instruments of transfer of land. 

Probate activities: Preparing probate papers for the courts. 

Notarial activities: Activities customarily carried out by notaries. 

Administration of oaths: Exercising powers to administer oaths. 

Why are these activities reserved?

• Consumer protection: 

  The law designates these activities as reserved to protect the public from potential harm, such as significant financial or personal detriment, which may not be adequately remedied after the fact. 

Regulation: 

They ensure that these high-risk legal services are provided by authorized and regulated professionals who adhere to codes of conduct and ethical standards. 

Who can perform reserved legal activities?

• Authorized persons: 

  Solicitors, barristers, and other legal professionals authorized by approved regulators. 

Exempt persons: 

Some individuals or bodies may be exempt from the requirement to be authorized. 

Consequences of unauthorized activity: 

• Criminal offense: 

  Performing a reserved legal activity without the necessary authorization is a criminal offense.

Penalties: 

Individuals found guilty of this offense face potential fines or imprisonment

Examples of Exempt Persons:

• Immigration: 

  Diplomatic and consular staff, heads of state, government members, and employees of international organizations are exempt from immigration control. 

Financial Services: 

Some professional firms, such as lawyers or accountants, may be exempt from authorization by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) for certain activities, and entities like the Bank of England are exempt under a specific order. 

Charities: 

Institutions listed in Schedule 3 of the Charities Act are exempt from certain requirements if they are acting as charities. 

Data Protection: 

Individuals do not have the right to be informed about their personal data if the organization is legally compelled to make it public. 

Coupon-mad

Yep - I did say that - but things move quickly: it was only last month (brand new case law) and we've discussed the implications of Mazur further since then, on the dedicated thread.

PolePosition2

Hearing today. Hope the judge is sympathetic to my case and if JB doesn't turn up then he strikes it out.

Whether I win whether I lose I've stood up to my principles and in what I believe.

Never done this before so have absolutely no idea what to expect.

Le_Kirk

Good luck, let us know when you win.