Claim form received from DCB legal

ryder1time

Coupon-mad said:

I doubt you appealed by email which is why it isn't in your sent emails. You did it online.

So she adds to her appeal (as well as the above stuff I already gave you) that they already hold the name & address of the driver because he appealed in MONTH/YEAR with evidence. Therefore they should never have continued to pursue the keeper which is unlawful. (Plus the EA point as above).

Yes, that makes sense that I did it online. I vaguely recall now. 

Okay I will add that into the appeal. Thanks

Coupon-mad

It's not an 'appeal'.

She is defending a claim. Ironically, far easier!

ryder1time

ryder1time said:

Coupon-mad said:

I doubt you appealed by email which is why it isn't in your sent emails. You did it online.

So she adds to her appeal (as well as the above stuff I already gave you) that they already hold the name & address of the driver because he appealed in MONTH/YEAR with evidence. Therefore they should never have continued to pursue the keeper which is unlawful. (Plus the EA point as above).

Yes, that makes sense that I did it online. I vaguely recall now. 

Okay I will add that into the appeal. Thanks

Hello. 

Thanks for all help so far.

Is the following appropriate based on your advice and using Shahib02 template?

As per advice from another forumite. Do you suggest I also email DCB legal asking them to drop the claim based on the circumstances? 

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 12/02/2023" (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.

3.1  The defendant confirms they were the registered keeper but was not the driver. This has been confirmed via the initial online appeal in February 2024 by the driver directly with Euro Car Parks. However, the claimant has continued to unlawfully pursue the keeper with numerous letters.

The claimant  KNOWS this is an Equality Act (protected consumer) case. As part of the appeal in February 2024 evidence was provided in relation to this. But, they refused to cancel the PCN. This has since developed into illegal harassment. Having ignored their duties under the Equality Act as a service provider and bombarded the defendant with multiple £170 debt demands then an unenforceable claim.

Coupon-mad

Clearly this (below) needs to be removed as your POC are not like shahib's at para 2 (no current DCB one is using that wording any more; they changed it):

"Paragraph 2 is denied. No PCN was "issued on 12/02/2023" (the date of the alleged visit)."

And don't put 'know' in capital letters and that paragraph needs a number.