Hi There,

my wife has received a letter from DCBL stating an overdue amount of £180 is owed to New Generation Parking Management?

they have the usual second stage, third stage amounts £160 and £265.

The heading reads NOTICE OF DEBT ASSIGNMENT ?

haven't got a clue what that means.

We can't remember having a letter from New Generation Parking Management?

no where does it say what the the charges are for,

just that they want me to send them this money (they have no chance of that)

they have 4 logos at the bottom of the letter, ICO. bsi. UKAS, and BPA.

they also state under their logo that they are certified bailiffs and High court enforcement.

How can they send a notice that does not clearly set out what the assigned best is

Your advice on this matter would be much appreciated.

Thanks

everything is in this thread go back and read from post 1

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?454888-dcbl-notice-of-enforcement-re-New-Generation-Parking-charge-notice&p=4856147#post4856147

bottom line...

ignore them...

bugger all they can do

Not sure if this is of any use but I have checked the Certificated Enforcement Agent (Bailiff) Register on the justice site and can not find any one from this company DCBL certificated to be a bailiff, not sure if there is any other register of baliffs?

Not sure if this is of any use but I have checked the Certificated Enforcement Agent (Bailiff) Register on the justice site and can not find any one from this company DCBL certificated to be a bailiff, not sure if there is any other register of baliffs?

In this instance they are working as debt collectors and demanding unlawful fees.

Just received another letter of these clowns,

the new one quite strangely has has the Certified Bailiffs and High Court Enforcement Officers removed

and a statement added this case is not subject to High Court or Bailiff action

Also the cost has gone down by £20?

the heading has changed from Notice of Debt Assignment to Notice of Debt Transfer

There is no mention of any other fees like the first letter

which clearly states

Second stage Enforcement Fee £160,

Third stage Enforcement fee £260

stated before we never recieved a letter telling us we had parked illegally??

I wonder what a district Judge would think of the false representation on the first letter,

also making threats of Bailiff action and High court enforcement,

quite bewildered with it all?

hopefully they do carry out their threat of court action so we can see their explanation of the threatening letters

they have been sending out with no legality at all?

i wonder if we all will (ppl who had the 1st load bull poo letters ) start getting these new letters . what date was you alleged ticket as mine is june 2014..

bennyball,

it is all just rubbish and they are playing a percentages game.

If one person pays up then that covers all of the costs of pursuing another 10 people

plus a bit of profit as well.

Another company has tried this trick and got absolutely destroyed every time it actually got to court.

They are relying on you believing that as they are peoper certified bailiffs

they actually have some sort of rights or at least abilitiy to collect this "debt"

Even the assignment isnt legal

so the last thing they ever want to do is arrive at court and see someone sitting opposite them.

In reality, if the debt was real it would be the amount of the contractual obligation and court filing fees and no more.

i just dont understand how these people are allowed to keep doing this .

as you said its all rubbish and hoping some one will be frightened scared harassed in to paying up .

. but in this day and age this should not be happening

WHY is the lazy government not doing some thing ....opps answered my own question

.. it should not be allowed

..as i have a 90 old lady living next door to me

and she has told me so many times she's been conned out money .

. from builder's to charity's

as this old lady soon as she gets a bill she pays it

even tho she dont know what its for

i have helped her over the years with these

she asked me if i could check if its real

..so on .

..these are the type of ppl these parasites pick on

mind you if it was not for this forum id have paid by now

. so i know how it feels to be scared/frightened by these ppl

I think that as they are trying to collect a 'commercial debt' there are no fixed rules to abide by. Parking charges are not a CCA regulated activity.

If they were to be collecting using the interim permission from the FCA, they would get into serious trouble.

I think it is April this year that all registered companies must have applied for full permission and if not, will be removed from the register

Based on the latest letter, they have been spoken too but that does not address the problem of them using fake bailiff forms to intimidate people. Just because they have added the new rider doesn't stop it worrying people into paying up.

I doubt they will try it on in a court as they know they would get laughed out although, until they actually own the debt, they can't

own thread created

Thanks everyone for your comments, really reassuring to know there are people out there that can see what parasites these people are, feel sorry for the people who do pay up

Sorry IDR the date the letter was 05th January 2016 not sure what the date of the parking penalty was for as I have never seen anything from the parking company?

penalty..hope not..

dx

Sorry IDR the date the letter was 05th January 2016 not sure what the date of the parking penalty was for as I have never seen anything from the parking company?

If they call it a Penalty they are in a pickle. They are not a Local Authority they are a DCA acting for a PPC.

I have just received another letter, this time it has the heading LEGAL RECOVERY ACTION

it states:

you have failed to pay the outstanding balance of £160 or to contact us to discus the repayment of this debt.

We have now recommended to our client the commencement of legal action against you.

However the granting of judgements and other orders are at the discretion of the courts.

If successful the escalation of legal proceedings at a cost of £75 would be added to the debt for recovery.

After further applications have been granted by the court the possible impacts of having a CCJ registered against you would be.

Enables enforcement action to commence. Such as obtaining an Attachment of Earnings placing a charge on your property or applying for warrant of control to remove goods.

 

Prevent further lending

 

To make sure no further legal recovery action will take place please make immediate payment by one of the following methods.

 

etc etc.

 

 

Also surprisingly under their heading Dcbl, Certificated Bailiffs & High Court Enforcement has suddenly reappeared?

 

 

Any advice would be most welcome please

I could recommend that you take court action against them but that would be your decision. It's just the same with their letter, they can recommend that their client can shove their heads up their backsides but they cannot force them to.

It is, again, just another threat. Nothing DCBL can do.

To make sure no further legal recovery action will take place please make immediate payment by one of the following methods.

They cannot say this as they are not the principle in this matter. They could say 'may' but definitely not 'will' as that id down to the client.

Have the amounts increased or decreased with this letter?

Hi Silverfox, thanks very much for your advice, the 3 letter I have received from Dcbl, (never got the original from the parking firm?) the first letter from dcbl had £180, but also had stages of enforcement

1st stage £160

2nd Stage £265

the second letter then went down to £100 but with an administration fee of £60?

the 3rd is as above.

Thanks very much for your advice the wife is really worried

Not sure if this means anything but at the bottom of the first letter it had

ICO, BSI, UKAS, BPA logos, but on the last two the ICO logo has disappeared, all underneath the logos on the first letter they had Direct collection Bailiffs which has disappeared off the two recent letters.

why dont these ppl clear off (dcbl)and let ppl get on with there lives .no one needs these bottom feeders in there lives .. all they do is wrong /illegal yet they still allowed to operate ......

who own's this disgusting company dcbl they should not be allowed to run disgusting company....

shut it down .................

Thanks for your support IDR

I get the feeling a certain person at DCBL has a hand in these letters, maybe she needs it to pay airfares.

who own's this disgusting company dcbl they should not be allowed to run disgusting company....

Ben and Stephen Pinner along with Gary Robinson

Ben Pinner

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/officers/K-8k8-W3zD0K3F1_Fz68oJa6qFw/appointments

Stephen Pinner

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/officers/03FWIAzX9g9RX40fK0_hi3JfH_U/appointments

Gary Robinson

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/officers/Pvo4TfFGIA-5r6_O6WWNjEDPGOw/appointments

I get the feeling a certain person at DCBL has a hand in these letters, maybe she needs it to pay airfares.

You mean the one who is the HCEO who delegates and exercises Due Diligence in the enforcement of a Writ from the US of A? The one who was spanked in court when asking for relief from being sued by the company she virtually bamkrupted in a botched enforcement against an innocent third party in: Huntress Search Ltd and Another v Dsi Food Ltd 2010

You mean the one who is the HCEO who delegates and exercises Due Diligence in the enforcement of a Writ from the US of A? The one who was spanked in court when asking for relief from being sued by the company she virtually bamkrupted in a botched enforcement against an innocent third party in: Huntress Search Ltd and Another v Dsi Food Ltd 2010

And the one responsible for the debacle at the Fish & Chip Shop.

You mean the one who is the HCEO who delegates and exercises Due Diligence in the enforcement of a Writ from the US of A? The one who was spanked in court when asking for relief from being sued by the company she virtually bamkrupted in a botched enforcement against an innocent third party in: Huntress Search Ltd and Another v Dsi Food Ltd 2010

If a writ has been enforced and a person considers that there has been some wrongdoing, then responsibility will indeed be targeted towards Ms Claire Sandbrook as it is her name that will be endorsed on the reverse of the writ. Naturally, questions must centre on how she is able to carry out her role when she is mainly resident in the USA.