• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum.
    Please Register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
    REGISTER
    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

Letter of Claim - NTK sent 72 days after alleged offence

Collapse
Loading...
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Letter of Claim - NTK sent 72 days after alleged offence

    Good morning all,

    My apologies, I know there is a lot of information on this forum, I suffer from over-thinking and anxiety and really need some help on what I should do next.

    I received a Letter of Claim from DCBLegal about a PCN (NTK) that was issued 72 days after the alleged event in 2017.

    There client is CPPlus Ltd and the clients property was the RoadChef, Clacket Lane South.

    If they had issued and posted the PCN within 14 days of the event, it would have been dealt with by me as the keeper. But I left the country a month after the event and did not return until 4-months later at which point I found both the original NTK and a reminder. On the back it said I only had 28 days to appeal from the issue date on the first NTK and 14 days from the date of the reminder. Being out of the country I was totally unaware that they existed, so could not appeal them.

    After looking on the forums the advice I took at the time was that the NTK was invalid, as being an ANPR PCN they should have sent me to me within 14 days. This is nothing to do with me being out of the country, this is the date of the alleged offence written on the PCN and the Date of Notice written on the PCN being 73 days apart.

    I decided to ring CPPlus and explain that I had been out of the country and needed to reset the clock on the appeals clock as I had only just seen them. They told me that they could not do that and I only had 2 choices - pay the charge or go to court. At that point I ceased communication with CPPlus or any of the other Debt collection agencies. I received over a dozen letters over the years, including one from a so called solicitor / none of which I responded to.

    I did respond to DCBLegal on receipt of the Letter of Claim sent last month asking for 170 - they say is the PCN and debt recovery costs. After getting some free legal advice from my car insurance and confirming the original PCN was invalid, I rang them and told them I was going to dispute it on that basis. They refused to acknowledge the PCN was invalid and said as they had no information because they were a Debt collection agency acting on instruction from CPPlus. They also said at the end of the call `we will make a note you have received the letter and acknowledged the balance` - which I quickly refuted and said the only thing I acknowledge is receiving your letter. I recorded the conversation with their permission.

    So I disputed the Letter of Claim, both on their website and with a letter sent by recorded mail - stating the requirements laid down in Schedule 4 (4) (1) 0f the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 for the issue of a NTK PCN.

    They responded to that letter, again did not mention the 72 days or invalid PCN but stated that under the act their client was entitled to recover any unpaid charges from the keeper. They also tried to imply that their client had 14 days to send the PCN after applying to DVLA and receiving my details. They also said their client was correct in refusing the appeal and also stating that I had exceeded all other appeal options. Fact is I have never appealed as they denied me that right. They say they will issue a claim through the court in 30 days unless I pay the. 170.

    I received that letter last Saturday morning. I only work weekends at the moment collecting Covid tests for the Royal Mail, the impact is I am not sleeping and really getting anxious about the whole thing. Sunday I went to work with no sleep the night before and I am driving all day, so it is not sustainable, I sit here now at 3:30 writing this and think maybe I need to ask my doctor for some strong sleeping tablets but want to avoid it. I also asked DCBLegal to remove the slogan Cant Pay? We`ll Take it Away slogan, but they refused that too - saying it was embedded in their template.

    So my apologies for the length of my post, but I wanted to put all the details out there.

    My question is can I stop this and is my case really watertight? What is my next step? I would really like to stop this in its tracks if possible and prevent any further attempts like this.

    Thanks in advance of any help and advice you can provide.
    Tags: None

  • #2
    Unless you have identified the driver then you have a good case. I would suggest not phoning as you may inadvertently let slip who was driving.
    So first of all do they have the identity of the driver, simple yes or no.

    The 14 days is POFA 9 (2) (4) if there was no windscreen ticket.

    Can you post up the redacted ticket but leave dates.

    Comment


    • #3
      Hi Ostell,

      thank you for very much for the quick response.

      The are coming at me as the Registered Keeper as I have not identified the driver.

      I will upload the redacted PCN shortly, they have suggested in there response to my letter (disputing their Letter of Claim) that their client has 14 days from receiving the details from DVLA whatever that day is.

      thank you again.

      Comment


      • #4
        Hi Ostell,

        Here is the redacted PCN.
        Attached Files

        Comment


        • #5
          Is this a hire or lease car?

          There are also several other POFA requirements missing in that letter

          The requirement is delivered within 14 days of the alleged breach.

          Comment


          • #6
            No this is my own car which I still have.

            That is what I have been told about about the 14 days, its a ridiculously big gap between the alleged breach and issuing the PCN. There was never any ticket on the screen and only done by ANPR.

            Adding 70 onto the 100 is criminal too.

            I thought about sending CPPlus a Cease and Desist Letter to stop them following through with court action, I hate the idea of this hanging over my head as I have a daughter to visit in Germany and no one here to open the post. I think they are relying on me caving in or a default judgement if I am out of the country..

            Thank you again for taking the time to repond.

            Comment


            • #7
              HI Ostell,

              I have attached a redacted copy of both the Letter of Claim and their response to me disputing the Letter of Claim over the 14 day rule.

              Thanks again.
              Attached Files

              Comment


              • #8
                The failures are:
                • Failure to deliver within 14 days of the parking event, 9 (4), period defined in 9 (5). The date of delivery by the DVLA is irrelevant.
                • Failure to give the invitation to keeper as required by 9 (2) (e).
                • Failure to give notice of keeper liability required by 9 (2) (f)
                • Failure to give period of parking required by 9 (2) (a). Times from moving in front of a camera cannot, by definition, be parking
                • Failure to identify the creditor, 9 (2) (h)
                Point out their misinterpretation of the 14 day rule and remind DCBL of the above and that there can therefore be no keeper liability in this matter.

                The list was from the first page so check the items are not on the reverse
                Last edited by ostell; 21st July 2021, 20:44:PM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Thanks Ostell,

                  Points 2 & 3 are alluded to on the PCN but I assume there should be a correct way of wording it.

                  There is no mention of who the creditor is on the back, only how to pay, the appeals process, data protection act and a charge notice payment slip.

                  DCBLegal have a complaints procedure which leads through to the Legal Ombudsman Service and Solicitor Regulation Authority which I am thinking of using as I cannot believe these people do not advise their clients of the legal position of pursuing a PCN. The fact that they then invite you on the Letter of Claim to have a dispute resolution call and then say they have no knowledge of the case and act on instruction from their clients is disgusting. There letters are not even signed by anyone as you would expect if it was a correct and proper legal entity.

                  Would I be correct in thinking there is nothing to do until I get the Claim from the court and engaging with them will bring nothing. I feel these people simply apply to the courts in bulk and simply play on the odds that they get a default judgment through no response, poor defence or just lucky.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Send what I suggested

                    Read POFA 9 (2), it starts "the notice must " and then continue with "state", "specify" etc. Alluded to is not good enough.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Okay great. Thank you for your help, I will keep you updated.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        And suggest to them that perhaps a suitable path would be via an alternate path such as POPLA

                        Comment

                        View our Terms and Conditions

                        LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

                        If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


                        If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.
                        Working...
                        X