We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Another ECP/DCB Defence
JellycatDee
Posts: 4 Newbie
Hi,
I've taken some time to go through a lot of the threads on here and think I'm finally ready to submit my own defence. Any help you lovely people can give would be amazing.
Background:
ECP is or was (I haven't been back since) managing this site that has a Sainsburys on. I can't remember if the machines weren't working but I assume so as I did spend money in Sainsburys (checked my bank statements) and not one to not purchase a ticket. Also I'm no longer the owner of the vehicle, not sure if this makes a difference.
Redacted claim form below
Issue date: 21 Nov 25
AoS on MCOL: 01 Dec 25
[Image redacted by Forum Team for personal information]
Defence (taken from template and others)
2. The allegation(s) and heads of cost are vague and liability is denied for the sum claimed, or at all. At the very least, interest should be disallowed; the delay in bringing proceedings lies with the Claimant. This also makes retrieving material documents/evidence difficult, which is highly prejudicial. The Defendant seeks fixed costs (CPR 27.14) and a finding of unreasonable conduct and further costs (CPR 46.5). The Defendant has little recollection of events, save as set out below and to admit that they were the registered keeper.
3. Referring to the POC: paragraph 1 is denied. The Defendant is not indebted to the Claimant. Paragraph 2 is denied. 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.
If I'm missing anything, any pointers would be appreciated!
Thanks
I've taken some time to go through a lot of the threads on here and think I'm finally ready to submit my own defence. Any help you lovely people can give would be amazing.
Background:
ECP is or was (I haven't been back since) managing this site that has a Sainsburys on. I can't remember if the machines weren't working but I assume so as I did spend money in Sainsburys (checked my bank statements) and not one to not purchase a ticket. Also I'm no longer the owner of the vehicle, not sure if this makes a difference.
Redacted claim form below
Issue date: 21 Nov 25
AoS on MCOL: 01 Dec 25
[Image redacted by Forum Team for personal information]
Defence (taken from template and others)
2. The allegation(s) and heads of cost are vague and liability is denied for the sum claimed, or at all. At the very least, interest should be disallowed; the delay in bringing proceedings lies with the Claimant. This also makes retrieving material documents/evidence difficult, which is highly prejudicial. The Defendant seeks fixed costs (CPR 27.14) and a finding of unreasonable conduct and further costs (CPR 46.5). The Defendant has little recollection of events, save as set out below and to admit that they were the registered keeper.
3. Referring to the POC: paragraph 1 is denied. The Defendant is not indebted to the Claimant. Paragraph 2 is denied. 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.
If I'm missing anything, any pointers would be appreciated!
Thanks
1
Comments
-
Car reg in PoC not redacted. Ask for image to be removed using the red Report. You can't edit or delete your posts until your Newbie status changes to Forumite. Repost image with car reg redacted.3
-
Thanks @Nellymoser image below with car reg redactedNellymoser said:Car reg in PoC not redacted. Ask for image to be removed using the red Report. You can't edit or delete your posts until your Newbie status changes to Forumite. Repost image with car reg redacted.
2
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.8K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.8K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.6K Spending & Discounts
- 245.8K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.7K Life & Family
- 259.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards