UKPC via DCB Legal - Response Advice

Coupon-mad

We mean that is a template reply!

Wait for the claim form.

Gr1pr

There isn't one, this stage is just preliminary sparring,  now completed 

Yes, wait for the Money Claim,  meanwhile,  chill

Pjfclee

Hi all, I've had the claim letter come through today.

With the below information. Please do let me know if you require any more.

1. The Defendant (D) is indebted to the Claimant (C) for a Parking Charge (PC) issued to vehicle xxxx Road. Chatham, Kent.
2. The date of contravention is 19/03/2025 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: Registered Users Only Defendant is
3. In the alternative the 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 rate of 8.00% per annum pursuant to s.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 from the date hereof at a daily rate of £0.02 until judgment or sooner payment. 3. Costs and court fees

Gr1pr

So its UKPC via DCB legal ( please add UKPC To the beginning of the thread title )

Post the Issue date from the top right of the claim form below

Pjfclee

Thank you, issue date is 28th January.

Gr1pr

Complete the AOS online on MCOL next week, from Tuesday onwards

Adapt the defence template after studying the 8 steps

Pjfclee

Amazing, thank you. I'll certainly do that.

Le_Kirk

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81862595#Comment_81862595

With an issue date of 28/01/26 and providing you complete(d) the AoS after 02/02/26 and before or on 16/02/26 your defence deadline date is 4.00 p.m. on 02/03/26

Pjfclee

Thank you all, I've competed the AOS today and now in the process of preparing my defence.

Pjfclee

I'm looking to submit my defence tomorrow as I head away soon. This is the draft or the section I am due to make my own. Just wondered how it sounds?

1. The Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle on the material date and had driven to Horsted Retail Park to take his child to a scheduled swimming lesson. The visit was entirely legitimate, and the Defendant was a genuine user of the facilities on site.
2. The car park was extremely poorly lit at the time, with large areas in darkness. The signage that UKPC rely upon was unlit and not visible in those conditions. The main sign at the entrance was partially obscured by a bike shelter, making it unreadable to any driver entering or parking in the car park.
3. No clear terms were visible, no “Registered Users Only” message was apparent, and the Defendant was unaware of any restriction or contractual terms. The darkness and layout of the site meant that no contract could have been formed by way of adequate notice.
4. The only evidence ever provided by UKPC was a pitch‑black photograph showing nothing except the presence of the vehicle. It does not show any contravention, signage, lighting conditions, or breach of terms, and falls far short of establishing liability.