Civil National Business Center Court Claim ?? From Parking Charge 2 years ago

[des8]

So the car park land has the right of access along the road, but the parts are in different ownership.

Unlikely that the car park company have right to manage parking on the access road (hence no signage there.
They should have a problem in court, if they don't discontinue

[gewag]

Afternoon so now have an email from DCB Legal

Dear ............,

We write further to your request for evidence.

In due course, the Court will order that both parties file and serve all evidence they intend to rely on. We confirm you will therefore receive all relevant evidence in advance of the hearing.

Please find attached all evidence we currently have on file.

Kind Regards,

Emily Maloney

DCB Legal Ltd

They have shown a photo of signage at the entrance to the private road in October 2021 , the date of the fine was September 2022 these signs at the front were not present when parking charge was issued. And these Signs are not present now, The car was stationary with engine running and driver in the car in front of the box on the highway see photo the car was not parked only stationary just over a minute 104 seconds, the driver was facing to the highway so would not see any signs regardless. how would we defend this Kind Regards Steve

[des8]

You will be able to point out the discrepancy in dates of when the pictures were taken, and show the signs are no longer present. and ask when they were removed.

And what do those tiny signs on Costa Coffee say, not that they would be legible by the driver/

Wait and see what evidence comes in their witness statement.

I would not be surprised if this claim is discontinued before the hearing.

[gewag]

Evening So new Update have an email: Text as follows

Good morning
Having reviewed the content of your defence, we write to inform you that our client intends to proceed with the claim.
In due course, the Court will direct both parties to each file a directions questionnaire. In preparation for that, please find attached a copy of the Claimant's, which we confirm has been filed with the Court.
Without Prejudice to the above, in order to assist the Court in achieving its overriding objective, our client may be prepared to settle this case - in the event you wish to discuss settlement, please call us on 0203 434 0433 within 7 days and make immediate reference to this correspondence.
If you have provided an email address within your Defence, we intend to use it for service of documents (usually in PDF format) hereon in pursuant to PD 6A (4.1)(2)(c). Please advise whether there are any limitations to this (for example, the format in which documents are to be sent and the maximum size of attachments that may be received). Unless you advise otherwise, we will assume not.
Kind Regards,
Alexandria Owens
DCB Legal Ltd
I have attached Questionnaire small claims track

So I will need to prepare my evidence I need a little guidance Kind Regards Steve

[des8]

Standard letter from DCBL

So now acknowledge that letter and remind them that contrary to their earlier assertion regarding evidence (your post 32) the Preaction Protocol For Debt Claims anticipates both sides to exchange sufficient information to help clarify any issues in dispute. Their refusal to produce documentation (including but not confined to the Parking Co's contract with the land occupier) on which they intend to rely does not comply with the protocol's requirements, and will be brought to the court's attention in due course.

You can download your own copy of the N180 here (https://www.gov.uk/government/public...l-claims-track) to save waiting for the court. Send copies to court and DCBL
Agree to mediation, and ask for local court and a hearing in person (not a paper hearing)

[gewag]

Standard letter from DCBL

So now acknowledge that letter and remind them that contrary to their earlier assertion regarding evidence (your post 32) the Preaction Protocol For Debt Claims anticipates both sides to exchange sufficient information to help clarify any issues in dispute. Their refusal to produce documentation (including but not confined to the Parking Co's contract with the land occupier) on which they intend to rely does not comply with the protocol's requirements, and will be brought to the court's attention in due course.

You can download your own copy of the N180 here (https://www.gov.uk/government/public...l-claims-track) to save waiting for the court. Send copies to court and DCBL
Agree to mediation, and ask for local court and a hearing in person (not a paper hearing)

Thankyou , This claim is for my Daughter and with her permission I told her I would deal with the claim thinking this would be a simple case of lack of signage etc., the reason is she has moved to Devon and just had a newborn and this is stress she doesn't need , the parking claim is from a road in Woodford London Essex so having a mediation in person is not doable.

Maybe I should write to dbcl legal with this evidence with Photos and see if they take it further kind regards Steve

PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE OF LACK OF SIGNAGE

1. The Defendant has provided contemporaneous photographic evidence dated 4th September 2022 demonstrating the complete absence of adequate parking signage at critical locations within the parking area, specifically:
   • No signage at the entrance to the private road
   • No visible signs above Costa Coffee
   • No signs on the opposite walls adjacent to the restaurant premises
2. By contrast, the Claimant's own photographic evidence, dated 14th October 2021, confirms the lack of proper, visible signage at these crucial locations. This photographic evidence categorically demonstrates:
   • A systematic failure to provide clear, conspicuous parking restriction notices
   • Non-compliance with the British Parking Association Code of Practice, which requires standard entrance signage
3. The absence of signage is not merely a technical oversight but a fundamental breach of:
   • The requirements for forming a valid parking contract
   • Paragraph 2(2) of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, which mandates that notices must be "adequate to bring the charge to the notice of drivers"
4. The temporal consistency of the photographic evidence (both the Defendant's and Claimant's photographs) provides irrefutable proof that:
   • No adequate parking restrictions were in place
   • Drivers could not have been reasonably expected to understand any purported parking terms
   • No enforceable contract could have been formed due to lack of clear, visible signage
5. The Defendant therefore contends that the photographic evidence conclusively demonstrates:
   • A complete failure to provide proper notice of parking conditions
   • The impossibility of a driver entering into a knowing, voluntary parking agreement
   • The fundamental invalidity of any attempted parking charge enforcement
   • Ive updated the Relevant Facts section to explicitly highlight:
   • The exact duration of the vehicle's stop (206 seconds)
   • That the vehicle was stationary with the engine running
   • The purpose was passenger drop-off
   • This was not an intentional parking action
   • Shows no intention to park
   • Challenges the basis of issuing a parking charge
   • Reinforces the argument of no contract formation
   • The precise timing (206 seconds) is particularly useful as it clearly shows this was a momentary stop, not a parking event.

[des8]

You can write all you like to DCBL, but it is always a waste of time!
They will take no notice and just plough on with their templates, hoping the victim just gives in.

Do DCBL know they are not dealing with the registered keeper?
Who signed the defence?

Mediation is over the phone, and with no direct contact with each other.

[gewag]

You can write all you like to DCBL, but it is always a waste of time!
They will take no notice and just plough on with their templates, hoping the victim just gives in.

Do DCBL know they are not dealing with the registered keeper?
Who signed the defence?

Mediation is over the phone, and with no direct contact with each other.

My daughter signed the defence online her end and I have been corresponding

[gewag]

Claim History

Your acknowledgment of service was submitted on 28/10/2024 at 11:56:39

Your acknowledgment of service was received on 28/10/2024 at 14:05:06

Your defence was received on 21/11/2024. today is 20/12/2024

Attached is the reply from the court stating If the claimant wishes to proceed they have to inform the court within 28 days, today is 29 days and I have checked on MCOL "Recent Transactions For Defendant" it looks like they have not contacted the court to proceed ?

kind regards Steve

[des8]

You might be in luck, and maybe they are not proceeding with the claim, but I doubt it as they responded directly to you.

They probably responded to the court at the same time, but the court has not yet updated the record due to a backlog.

[gewag]

You might be in luck, and maybe they are not proceeding with the claim, but I doubt it as they responded directly to you.

They probably responded to the court at the same time, but the court has not yet updated the record due to a backlog.

Just Checked On MCOL

Claim Status

A claim was issued against you on 18/10/2024

Your acknowledgment of service was submitted on 28/10/2024 at 11:56:39

Your acknowledgment of service was received on 28/10/2024 at 14:05:06

Your defence was received on 21/11/2024

DQ sent to you on 20/12/2024

DQ filed by claimant on 20/12/2024 Which is 1 day out to respond (29 Days)

So are proceeding now do I offer Evidence?

Kind Regards Steve

[des8]

No, not yet.
You follow court directions and complete the DQ (form N180 may be downloaded here: https://www.gov.uk/government/public...l-claims-track)

The advice is that when completing this form you indicate you want a hearing in person (not a paper hearing) at your home court. This is the opposite of what DCBL will be seeking.
Form is filed in court and served on DCBL

On receipt of your form the court will (eventually) issue directions regarding court location, track and evidence (witness statement)

[gewag]

No, not yet.
You follow court directions and complete the DQ (form N180 may be downloaded here: https://www.gov.uk/government/public...l-claims-track)

The advice is that when completing this form you indicate you want a hearing in person (not a paper hearing) at your home court. This is the opposite of what DCBL will be seeking.
Form is filed in court and served on DCBL

On receipt of your form the court will (eventually) issue directions regarding court location, track and evidence (witness statement)

Thank you!
So I fill this form can I use my details or registered keeper details i.e. my Daughter, as I said she lives 300 Miles away and with small baby and she has given me permission to deal with this, or can I represent her ? . the car was registered at my address and was sold a couple of years back.
So a hearing in my home court does not mean my daughter or I would have to attend ? how does this normally work ?
Kind Regards Steve

[des8]

I know your daughter has given you her permission to deal with this matter, but you need to tread very carefully.

It is an offence, punishable by a fine or imprisonment to carry out any reserved legal activity if you are not authorised
(Legal Services Act 2007).
Basically you need to be a lawyer!

One of the reserved activities is the defending of court issued proceedings and the performing of any ancillary functions in relation to those proceedings

All responses need to emanate from your daughter, with her address etc.
If she intends to defend this matter at a hearing, her attendance in court will be required.
You may, as long as she is in attendance, act as her "lay representative" in court (The Lay Representatives (Rights of Audience) 0rder 1999)

If it is intended that she continues to dispute this claim, it is recommended that you request a hearing in person.
Lay persons are at a disadvantage when opting for a paper hearing.