Group Nexus, DCB Legal court claim 2025, the driver parked in a disabled bay

evasivedavid

Coupon-mad said:

You can tell by looking at any Gladstones POC. They never state the breach.

and that invalidates their claim?

Gr1pr

No, but it may mean that the claim fails and is therefore unenforceable from the outset 

They may have a valid claim, but haven't said why,  the details are not in the POC 

Your thread title is an assumption of what it's about, it's not mentioned on the claim form,  is it  ?

The point about the POC is that it should state which rule was allegedly broken , such as

No white cars on a Monday   ( sic  )
Overstay 
Insufficient payment 
No payment at all on a pay to park car park 
No parking
Parked outside a marked bay
Parked on a loading area on hatching
Wheels over the white bay lines 
Parked in a clearly marked disabled bay without displaying a blue badge

Etc 

They don't say what it was, everybody has to guess, so unclear POC

Study the DCB Legal POC in other threads on here and compare 

Think about it,  if you were arrested, the breach would be explained as to why, breach of the peace,  public order, driving whilst under the influence of alcohol or drugs, no insurance,  drug dealing etc

Not, you are under arrest and we will tell you why in court 

evasivedavid

Gr1pr said:

No, but it may mean that the claim fails and is therefore unenforceable from the outset 

They may have a valid claim, but haven't said why,  the details are not in the POC 

Your thread title is an assumption of what it's about, it's not mentioned on the claim form,  is it  ?

The point about the POC is that it should state which rule was allegedly broken , such as

No white cars on a Monday   ( sic  )
Overstay 
Insufficient payment 
No payment at all on a pay to park car park 
No parking
Parked outside a marked bay
Parked on a loading area on hatching
Wheels over the white bay lines 
Parked in a clearly marked disabled bay without displaying a blue badge

Etc 

They don't say what it was, everybody has to guess, so unclear POC

Study the DCB Legal POC in other threads on here and compare 

Think about it,  if you were arrested, the breach would be explained as to why, breach of the peace,  public order, driving whilst under the influence of alcohol or drugs, no insurance,  drug dealing etc

Not, you are under arrest and we will tell you why in court 

Right, that makes sense.. thanks for clarifying

Sadly, they do mention the alleged infraction in the POC on my court letter.. So I guess their may be enforceable. therefore I'll submit my defence ASAP...

evasivedavid

Coupon-mad said:

You can tell by looking at any Gladstones POC. They never state the breach.

So just to be clear, as they mention the breach in the POC, my defence is relevant and strong enough? Just before I email it over.. Thanks

Gr1pr

Group Nexus via DCB Legal,  ( not Gladstones  ) so the alleged contravention or breach is mentioned in the POC, as you say,  so use the standard template and if S.E signed the claim form  ( not D.C. ) then add the extra Mazur paragraph as seen in other recent DCB Legal threads on here in the last few weeks 

It could be enforceable if it went to a hearing,  but they tend to discontinue before the hearing fee is due,  so we may never know 

Please edit your thread title to something more suitable like 

Group Nexus,  DCB Legal court claim 2025, the driver parked in a disabled bay 

evasivedavid

Gr1pr said:

Group Nexus via DCB Legal,  ( not Gladstones  ) so the alleged contravention or breach is mentioned in the POC, as you say,  so use the standard template and if S.E signed the claim form  ( not D.C. ) then add the extra Mazur paragraph as seen in other recent DCB Legal threads on here in the last few weeks 

It could be enforceable if it went to a hearing,  but they tend to discontinue before the hearing fee is due,  so we may never know 

Please edit your thread title to something more suitable like 

Group Nexus,  DCB Legal court claim 2025, the driver parked in a disabled bay 

Title changed.. Not sure what you mean by S.E though.. And the template I used was the standard one, I just amended it to fit my case specifics.. Is it okay as it is or are you saying that I should change it to the generic version? Sorry, just finding thsi all very confusing right now

Umkomaas

evasivedavid said:

Gr1pr said:

Group Nexus via DCB Legal,  ( not Gladstones  ) so the alleged contravention or breach is mentioned in the POC, as you say,  so use the standard template and if S.E signed the claim form  ( not D.C. ) then add the extra Mazur paragraph as seen in other recent DCB Legal threads on here in the last few weeks 

It could be enforceable if it went to a hearing,  but they tend to discontinue before the hearing fee is due,  so we may never know 

Please edit your thread title to something more suitable like 

Group Nexus,  DCB Legal court claim 2025, the driver parked in a disabled bay 

Title changed.. Not sure what you mean by S.E though.. And the template I used was the standard one, I just amended it to fit my case specifics.. Is it okay as it is or are you saying that I should change it to the generic version? Sorry, just finding thsi all very confusing right now

Sarah Ensall, erstwhile DCB Legal bulk signatory on Claim Forms.  Not allowed, Mazur applies.

Gr1pr

As above,  all you had to do is check the initials of the person who signed the claim form and compare

I dont know who signed it so I dont know if you need an extra paragraph regarding the recent Mazur decision,  or not

I won't check a defence that has say 10 to 12 paragraphs,  because I refuse to do a comparison with the template to see what YOU have changed or added or removed  ( we dont need to see any paragraphs that you left alone   )

Its your job to show us your homework,  not that of coupon mad 

evasivedavid

Gr1pr said:

As above,  all you had to do is check the initials of the person who signed the claim form and compare

I dont know who signed it so I dont know if you need an extra paragraph regarding the recent Mazur decision,  or not

I won't check a defence that has say 10 to 12 paragraphs,  because I refuse to do a comparison with the template to see what YOU have changed or added or removed  ( we dont need to see any paragraphs that you left alone   )

Its your job to show us your homework,  not that of coupon mad 

I'll have a look what's on the letter when I get home...

Gr1pr

OK, then show us ONLY YOUR ALTERED paragraphs with paragraph numbers,  for checking 

If S.E signed the claim form,  possibly on the back , add a new numbered paragraph about the Mazur decision,  by studying other recent dcb legal cases and add that too, with a number,  meaning post 2 or 3 altered, adapted or additional paragraphs,  not the template standard paragraphs that you haven't touched 

Once your homework is approved,  slot them into the template defence,  replacing the ones that you adapted with your own,  plus the Mazur paragraph if needed,  before you submit it on MCOL in the defence box 

This is a process,  where each defence has a few differences,  which is why a template is used,  but requires work from you too