DCB Legal claim

GollumTwo

I have a DCB legal claim form delivered to me and am currently drafting my defence. I have followed through the stickied threads and will be using the template defence, but for the particulars of the case, I am a bit confused on what I should include.

These are the actual facts I remember. I am the registered keeper but my husband was driving. We paid for 1 hours parking I think and overstayed maybe 10 minutes, before leaving. I dont remember the timings and they aren't stated in the PCNs or claim. It could be 20 minutes and I'm just remembering wrong.

But what should my actual defence be here? It seems like an admission that we did overstay. I had no idea of the "grace period" for the car park and thought it would be 20 minutes so we were fine. Does the fact I wasn't driving matter? I have never told the PCN company who was driving and ignored the demands for money for the last couple of years. I can't find any images of the signs within the car park that state the fees for overstays. The signs facing the street don't contain the small print.

Or am I best just trying to admit it all and argue over the amount I owe?

Coupon-mad

Which PPC?

Show us the POC, redacting your VRM.

am I best just trying to admit it all and argue over the amount I owe?

Absolutely not! Did you miss the Template Defence at the top of the forum?

GollumTwo

Coupon-mad said:

Which PPC?

Show us the POC, redacting your VRM.

am I best just trying to admit it all and argue over the amount I owe?

Absolutely not! Did you miss the Template Defence at the top of the forum?

This is the POC

I'll be using the template, so do I just omit what I know about the day and go into para 4? So for the actual para 3, should I go with something simple like:

The facts known to the Defendant:

3. 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 the Defendant was not the driver. The Defendant lived in Sheffield at the time and has never driven in Stockport.

3.1. Referring to the POC: paragraph 1 is denied. The Defendant is not indebted to the Claimant. 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.

Coupon-mad

Yes that'll do. They'll discontinue by Xmas.

Do stick around to respond with us (each individually) to the Public Consultation which is now open for August.

What parking operators do is is a national disgrace and a drain on Society, in terms of money and anxiety. If you want to be part of the push to change things in future, it's very important that people like you tell the Government that:

a) you have no faith in POPLA or the IAS and that there must be a SINGLE APPEALS SERVICE that people trust. The sector is crying out for an independent and impartial appeals service - not two involved in a race to the bottom - that will give a real option to resolve disputed cases out of court. 

b).  THE ENRICHMENT OF 'DEBT RECOVERY FEES' MUST BE COMPLETELY BANNED. CASES ARE NOT SOLVED BY DEMANDING MORE MONEY AND OFFERING A 'PAYMENT PLAN' THAT ONLY THE VULNERABLE PAY. DRAS LIKE DCB LEGAL MAKE NO MONEY IF THEY HANDLE DISPUTES IN THE SPIRIT OF THE APPEALS CHARTER, WHICH IS WHY THEY ALWAYS PLOUGH ON TO COURT CLAIMS AND CCJs, RATHER THAN OFFERING REAL RESOLUTION AT PRE-ACTION STAGE. THEY OFFER NOTHING, NO LEGITIMATE OPTION TO KEEP CASES OUT OF COURT.

c). Tell them about your experience and the complete and utter waste of court resources caused on a grand scale by greedy firms like this. If there had been an ADR you'd have used it, etc.

Responses are invited to the Consultation now:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6617396/parking-code-of-practice-consultation-8-weeks-from-11th-july-2025/p1

Do it this month pleeease!

We will discuss it further next week on that thread if you want ideas.

Car1980

3. 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 the Defendant was not the driver. The Defendant lived in Sheffield at the time and has never driven in Stockport. The Claimant refers to "The Contract', but has never supplied a copy of it. 

You could add that they've never supplied a copy of the contract.

This is a notorious car park with a faulty payment machine. Google the reviews.

All pretty moot though since they'll discontinue anyway.

GollumTwo

I've submitted the defence on MCOL. Do I need to send it to the DCB Legal as well?

I'll respond to the consultation too.

Gr1pr

No need, the CNBC in Northampton will send them a copy

Yes, please do the consultation