Court Letter defence - DCB Legal/National Parking Control

Coupon-mad

It is going away.

They'll discontinue.

But you already know what to prepare because WS & evidence stage is fully covered under IMPORTANT: KNOW WHAT HAPPENS WHEN' in post 2 of the NEWBIES thread. 

dustyyyeu

Apologies, I am just getting a little worried! I will keep my head screwed on and read before I question again, thank you!

Gr1pr

The incentive to discontinue is just before the hearing fee is due in several months time,  until them you should expect to be harassed into paying, because they have absolutely no reason to stop until they have to stump up a minimum of £27 for the hearing fee,  plus witness statements and exhibits 

Study a dozen or 2 dozen cases in the discontinuance thread by Umkomaas,  to see the pattern and to see what others have done already 

670 discontinuations and climbing is a definite pattern

dustyyyeu

Is this any good?

1.  On 16th September 2024, I visited Names and Address. -The resident is a lawful leaseholder of the property, which includes an allocated parking space and the right for visitors to park in designated visitor bays.

2.  I parked my vehicle, registration  REG,  in one of the marked visitor bays within the development, at the invitation of the resident I was visiting.

3.   The development is protected by a security gate, which can only be opened by residents. This means that entry to the parking area is restricted, and all vehicles entering the premises must be doing so with the permission or cooperation of a resident.

4.   The purpose of my visit was to begin a stay to house-sit and dog-sit for the residents while they were on their honeymoon.

5.  The resident informed me that no visitor permits had ever been provided to them by the management company or by the parking operator, National Parking Control Group Limited (“NPC”).

6.  There was no pay-and-display facility, pay-by-phone option, or any clear alternative method available for visitors to obtain a permit.

7.  The signage at the development did not contain any information about how a visitor could obtain or display a permit, nor any telephone number, QR code, or web address to facilitate this.

8.   Historically, parking enforcement at this development appears to have been inconsistent and poorly managed. It is common for vehicles to park in numbered (non-visitor) bays without permits or residency status and not receive any Parking Charge Notice. This inconsistency suggests that enforcement practices are arbitrary and do not reflect a fair or transparent management system.

The Parking Charge Notice (PCN)

1.  Subsequently, I received a Parking Charge Notice (“PCN”) from NPC alleging that I had parked without displaying a valid permit.

2.  I deny the allegation in full. I was parked lawfully, with the permission of a resident, in a space clearly marked for visitors.

3.  NPC has provided no evidence that a valid and binding contract was formed between myself and the operator.

4.  The signage was inadequate, unclear, and failed to communicate any reasonable means of compliance for visitors.

5.  The claimed amount of £170 is grossly inflated and bears no relation to any genuine pre-estimate of loss.

6.  The Claimant has suffered no financial loss. My vehicle did not occupy a resident’s allocated bay, and no damage or obstruction was caused.

No Breach of Prominent Terms

1.  The burden is on the Claimant to prove that clear and prominent contractual terms were displayed and that I knowingly entered into a contract agreeing to pay the specified sum.

2.  There was no visible or practical way for a visitor to obtain a valid permit, making compliance impossible. Any purported contract is therefore void for uncertainty and lack of transparency.

Conclusion

1.  I acted in good faith at all times. I parked in a designated visitor bay with the consent of a lawful resident.

2.  The Claimant’s charge is disproportionate, punitive, and contrary to the principles established in ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67, which held that private parking charges must be proportionate and serve a legitimate commercial interest.

3.  I therefore respectfully request that the Court dismiss the claim in its entirety.

Coupon-mad

A good start but nothing like recent ones.

@mtrolley123 has Mazur and is a good WS with sub headings in a DCB / Excel case.

You need Mazur in there as the claim was probably signed by unauthorised Sarah Ensall.

Le_Kirk

Coupon-mad said:

@mtrolley123 has Mazur and is a good WS with sub headings in a DCB / Excel case.

You need Mazur in there as the claim was probably signed by unauthorised Sarah Ensall.

Looking upthread the N1SDT was indeed signed by Sarah.

dustyyyeu

Received an email from DCB Legal:

Dear xxxxxxx

We act for the Claimant in the above matter.  

Our client has instructed us to discontinue Court proceedings and close our file. Therefore, please find enclosed the Claimant’s N279 Notice of Discontinuance for your records.  

The attached has also been filed with the Court. 

We will now proceed to close our file accordingly.

Gr1pr

Excellent 

Please post a redacted picture of the N279 document below so that your success can be added to the discontinuations thread by Umkomaas 

Coupon-mad

dustyyyeu said:

Received an email from DCB Legal:

Dear xxxxxxx

We act for the Claimant in the above matter.  

Our client has instructed us to discontinue Court proceedings and close our file. Therefore, please find enclosed the Claimant’s N279 Notice of Discontinuance for your records.  

The attached has also been filed with the Court. 

We will now proceed to close our file accordingly.

Great! Expected - but still a relief for you.

ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST!

But we can't count your success and I'm sure you want to stand up and be counted? We need to see a screenshot of the NoD please.

dustyyyeu

Gr1pr said:

Excellent 

Please post a redacted picture of the N279 document below so that your success can be added to the discontinuations thread by Umkomaas 

Should I wait for the physical copy in the post or will the digital copy they sent suffice?