UKPC/DCB Claim Form - Driver Left Site, Defence Submitted

TRNC

Claim form received for 4 PCNs for the false allegation of driving leaving site. Absolutely no evidence provided apart from pictures of a parked car.

Issue Date: 17 July 2026

AoS Completed: 24 July 2026

Defence paras 2 & 3:

2. The allegation(s) are vague and liability is denied for the sum claimed, or at all. The delay in bringing proceedings lies with the Claimant, making retrieving material evidence difficult, which is highly prejudicial. The Defendant has little knowledge of events, save as set out below and to admit that they were the registered keeper.

3. With reference to the POC: paragraph 1 is denied. The Defendant is not indebted to the Claimant. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant does not accept that contraventions occurred between XXXX & XXXX, as alleged. Whilst the Defendant is the registered keeper of the vehicle, paragraphs 3 and 4 are denied. The POC allege a breach described as “Driver Left Site Designated for Customer Parking Only”. This is denied and at pre-action stage this Claimant has provided no evidence whatsoever of what constitutes 'the site' or the driver leaving it. The Defendant puts the Claimant to strict proof of their allegation including photographic evidence and the site boundaries, as well as the signage and, if the Defendant is being pursued under the POFA, they must show full compliance with Schedule 4.

I could probably add more to para 3 but I didnt want to make it too long. Welcome any thoughts :)

yarpsnehpets

Could you post up one of the original PCNs for examination?

ChirpyChicken

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82082402#Comment_82082402

it isnt needed as doesn't matter in a case like this

Part 3 of the OPS defence is fine, get that logged, that will do, it may go to a hearing for 4 pcns but dont worry about that

TRNC

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82082424#Comment_82082424

Thank you, if I do need to provide one of the original PCNs I can do. These arent my PCNs and I am a little frustrated they didn't listen to my advice and go via POPLA as they would have been easy wins (I had one at the same site).

Understood that it could go to a hearing, I was surprised at the speed of issuing a Claims Form but I guess its because of the value. I can't see how they would possibly win at hearing though and it would be a waste of money on their end.

ChirpyChicken

No because the PCN really is irrelevant in this kind of case

there is zero evidence that you left site and i expect this kind of case to discontinue even with 4 PCNS but obviously a higher chance they will try it on

You are right low chance of winning and high chance of it discontinuing

Car1980

3. With reference to the POC: paragraph 1 is denied. The Defendant is not indebted to the Claimant. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant does not accept that breaches of contract occurred between 19/01/2025 & 27/01/2026, as alleged. Whilst the Defendant is the registered keeper of the vehicle, paragraphs 3 and 4 are denied. The POC allege a breach described as “Driver Left Site Designated for Customer Parking Only”. This is denied and at pre-action stage this Claimant has provided no evidence whatsoever of what constitutes 'the site' or the driver leaving it. At no point has the claimant ever supplied the contract(s) they are relying upon. The Defendant puts the Claimant to strict proof of their allegation including photographic evidence and the site boundaries, as well as the signage and, if the Defendant is being pursued under the POFA, they must show full compliance with Schedule 4.

Just a couple of tweaks to avoid making it sound like you're defending a police prosecution. Don't big them up.

Le_Kirk

With an issue date of 17/07/26 and having completed the AoS in a timely manner your defence deadline date is 4.00 p.m. on 19/08/26

Coupon-mad

This'll be discontinued, despite 4 PCNs. Bang in the template defence & follow the 8 steps to the letter. We'll see you again when they discontinue.

TRNC

DCB emailed following our defence submission, they attached all the "evidence" which is a few pictures of a parked car and the signs which say "If you leave the car park while your vehicle remains you may be issued with a notice of parking charge". Nothing showing anyone leaving the car park, or what the car park definition is (how would one even walk into shops without leaving the car park!?).

Obviously this isn't evidence at all and I won't get into the contents of their text in the email because its a waste of everyone's time. But is it worth responding to try and scare them into not taking it any further? By stating that they still haven't provided any evidence of their claim and that we will happily see them in court because they have no case and we intend to claim ordinary costs or is that just a waste of time?

Gr1pr

You are wasting your time, its a roboclaim conveyor belt and you certainly aren't going to scare them or to make them alter course

Stick to the process

A paid for court hearing is a long way off and probably won't happen

Coupon-mad

Just defend and play the game out.

🙂