Claim Form - DCB Legal/Parking Eye

The_J_Londoner

I've spent some time reading through the relevant threads at the top of the forum to educate myself the best I can, but as this is all new to me, I'd still appreciate some guidance for my particular case. 

I received below claim form for a Parking Charge that is now 3 years old.

I'll be acknowledging service on MCOL at some point this week, and will start drafting my defence after that.

Having read about a similar error in another thread, I noticed my claim form also has the incorrect PCN issue date in the POC section.  Do I add this to my defence, and if so where, or is this already included in the given templates on the forum?

Any guidance is much appreciated!

KeithP

With a Claim Issue Date of 25th February, you have until Monday 17th March 2025 to file an Acknowledgment of Service('AOS'), but there is nothing to be gained by delaying it. 

To file an AOS, follow the guidance in the Dropbox file linked from the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Having filed an AOS in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 31st March 2025 to file a Defence.

That's over 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 again at the second post on the NEWBIES thread - immediately following where you found the AOS guidance.

Don't miss the deadline for filing an AOS, nor that for filing a Defence.

Do not try and file a Defence via the MoneyClaimOnline website. Once an AOS 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.

The_J_Londoner

Thanks for your reply.

I've actually just been digging through the history of any correspondence I can find in relation to this PCN and to my surprise I found email correspondence with the land owner (hotel) who confirmed to me (with screenshot attachment) that they instructed PE to cancel the PCN.

I also found multiple correspondence of me informing PE with the driver details (different to keeper) yet they never contacted the driver and continued to request I pay the charge. They even sent me a 'letter before claim', before handing the debt collection over to DCBL.
I also sent DCBL a 'cease & desist' letter and demanded they delete my data in accordance with GDPR, all to no avail.

I'm actually tempted to file a counterclaim for harassment or the like for all the letters and emails I received over the last 3 years, but haven't a clue where to start. 

Would be curious from the experienced members on here whether this is something worth pursuing?

Coupon-mad

A counterclaim would have legs - yes - if as you say, you gave the name & address of the driver before court action.  They should have long since taken it up with the driver.

Search the forum for:

counterclaim Simon Clay data 2018 remedy

That will show you what's involved.

The_J_Londoner

UPDATE:

Please see below my draft for the defence, using @shahib_02 's template for paragraph 3. I have added Paragraph 4 (and will adjust the other paragraph numbers accordingly.)

I would really appreciate any feedback before I go ahead and submit my defence.

2.  The facts in this defence come from the Defendant's own knowledge and honest belief.  Conversely, the Claimant sets out a cut-and-paste incoherent and sparse statement of case. The POC appear to be in breach of CPR 16.4, 16PD3 and 16PD7, and fail to "state all facts necessary for the purpose of formulating a complete cause of action". The Defendant is unable, on the basis of the POC, to understand with certainty what case, allegation(s) and what heads of cost are being pursued, making it difficult to respond. However, the vehicle is recognised and it is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper, but NOT the driver at the time.

 

3.  Referring to the POC: paragraph 1 is denied. The Defendant is not indebted to the Claimant. Paragraph 2 is denied. No PCN was "issued on 20/02/2022" (the date of the alleged visit).  Whilst the Defendant is the registered keeper, paragraphs 3 and 4 are denied. The Defendant is not liable and has seen no evidence of a breach of prominent terms.  The quantum is hugely exaggerated (no PCN can be £170 on private land) and there were no damages incurred whatsoever. The Claimant is put to strict proof of all of their allegations.

 

4. The land owner had instructed the claimant on multiple occasions to cancel this charge. This in itself renders this charge void.

The_J_Londoner

Is paragraph 4 above relevant for now, or should this be included at the Witness Statement stage?

1505grandad

As posted by KeithP above:-

"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."

You should therefore use the Chan and Akande Defence (see Template Defence sticky)

Coupon-mad

The_J_Londoner said:

Is paragraph 4 above relevant for now, or should this be included at the Witness Statement stage?

You are using the wrong version. Did you miss reading the first post of the Template Defence thread? Link for these cases is there.

What you had as paras 3 and 4 are meant to be paragraph 6, as shown in the link specifically provided for these types of cases. Also, why didn't you add the really important fact that the D named the driver and transferred liability before court action commenced, so cannot be held liable in law. 

(You decided not to counterclaim then?)

The_J_Londoner

Thank you @Coupon-mad for your reply. Yes, I noticed I was using the wrong defence after the above post by @1505grandad .

I understand I should be using the defence template that refers to the Chan and Akande cases.

Regarding naming the driver, I did not initially remember all the details of the back and forth correspondence with PE as this was 3 years ago, but having now dug through my old emails I have found (based on PE's reply) that in my initial appeal I did not actually name the driver but just said that it wasn't me. Having read PE's reply to me at the time (attached below) they requested I provide them with the driver details, but having not indicated how I am to do this, it seems I just replied to the email, however, it bounced back as it was a 'no-reply' email address.

Considering the above, I'm assuming the argument that I 'named' the driver and therefore not liable is no longer relevant and shouldn't be included in my defence. Correct me if I'm wrong.

I decided to forgo the hassle of a counterclaim and just be happy with a win.

Coupon-mad

You're not wrong! 

The_J_Londoner

UPDATE: So I've received the DQ from the court.

I haven't found any guidance on this, does the front page need to be filled in as well or can I leave it blank?

Also, I found the N180 form in PDF format on the GOV website. Can I just fill that one in on my pc and email to the court as a PDF or do I need to fill in the paper form I was sent?

If I am to submit the paper form, is taking pics and sending as email attachment sufficient or does it need to be scanned or done some other way.

(I know there's lots of guidance on here for this and have read it, but just want to make sure I am getting this right.)

Thanks in advance for any guidance on the above!