UKPC / DCB Legal - defence draft, please advice

furrywhale

I'm fighting a UKPC /DCB Legal claim. The vehicle in question was parked at some retail park XX. However the contract submitted by UKPC during POPLA suggests that there are two distinct car parks there: XX - Car Park 1 and XX - Car Park 2. While they issued the PC under Car Park 1, the vehicle was actually parked in Car Park 2. I imagine this means they simply don't have a case at all? 

Draft defence (para 3 only):

3. Referring to the POC: paragraph 1 is denied. The vehicle in question was not parked at XXX - Car Park 1 at the time of the alleged contravention. This is evident in the claimant’s own submission of contract and photographic evidence during the POPLA appeal stage. The Defendant is not indebted to the Claimant. Paragraph 2 is denied. No PCN was "issued on XXX" (the date of the alleged visit).  Whilst the Defendant is the registered keeper and driver, paragraphs 3 and 4 are denied. To the Defendant's knowledge, there was no contravention and any purported terms on signs were inadequate and illegible (even by the claimant's own admission by virtue of the image of the signage). The Claimant is to put strict proof of all of their allegations. 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.

Particulars of Claim for context:

1. The Defendant (D) is indebted to the Claimant (C) for a Parking Charge (PC) issued to vehicle XXX at XXX - Car Park 1.
2. The date of contravention is XXX and the D was issued with a PC by the Claimant

3. The Defendant is pursued as the driver of the vehicle for breach of the terms on the signs (the contract). Reason: Not Parked Correctly Within The Markings Of The Bay Or Space.

4. In the alternative the Defendant is pursued as the keeper pursuant to POFA 2012, Schedule 4

AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS 

1. £170.00 being the total of the PC and damages

2. Interest at a 3.00% per annum pursuant to s.69 of the County 1984 from the date hereof at a daily rate £0.02 until judgment or soon 

3. Costs and court fees

Thanks in advance!

Coupon-mad

"The vehicle in question was parked at some retail park XX. However the contract submitted by UKPC during POPLA suggests that there are two distinct car parks there: XX - Car Park 1 and XX - Car Park 2. While they issued the PC under Car Park 1, the vehicle was actually parked in Car Park 2. I imagine this means they simply don't have a case at all? "

I agree. And anyway, DCB Legal always discontinue UKPC claims before hearings.

Good defence. All looks on track.

furrywhale

Update:

Received Notice of Allocation to the Small Claims Track in the post on 10th July, with deadline for WS bundle by EoD 22th July and court fee due by EoD 27th July. DCB Legal discontinued on 20th July.

Thanks Coupon-mad and everyone for the help! ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST!

Nellymoser

👏 do please post here redacted copy of your discontinuation document for Umkomaas to add you to his thread.

furrywhale

N279 - Notice Of Discontinuance_200726122920.jpg

Here you go.

Nellymoser

That's the doc @Umkomaas needs to see.

Coupon-mad

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82084317#Comment_82084317

Yay, thankyou and congrats!

ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST!

Calling @Umkomaas

😄

Umkomaas

Thank you @furrywhale for the copy of your NoD . I can now count your result in the infamous DCBL Legal thread of shame. 👍

patient_dream

Well done, the FAKE DAMAGES DUO fall in the sewers again