Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Just circling back with a thanks and an apology.   Apologies because, I honestly thought I'd replied to thank everyone and update, but turns out I hadn't. Sorry. So first of all, a big big thanks to the Forum and all those that helped me on this thread, especially @dx100uk and @AndyOrch. The work you do is awesome and I'm sure I'm only one of many who are extremely grateful for your support. So, in terms of a belated update, Moriarty withdrew, well they said ADCB did. So that's a result. Whilst that was a few years back, I still get emails from odd 'agents' locally in UAE - usually at a weekend - or reminders from ADCB. The sums offered by the agents for a settlement are a fraction of the sums that were claimed - like 75% less - so one would presume if one wished to settle, dealing direct with ADCB may be even less. If it helps anyone, what I would say is this. 1) Listen to the advice from the trusted sources on here. They know their onions. 2) It can seem overwhelming to a layman with all this legal jargon, but don't let it scare you. Just take it a step at a time, listen and learn as much as you can from other threads, and trust the process. 3) I was surprised how shambolic Moriarty appeared to be in my case. Don't ever think the other party is above you in terms of knowledge, experience or how they will conduct themselves. Whilst it was during the pandemic, even on the remote calls with the court, in one instance Moriarty didn't even bother attending the call. In other instances, they didn't reply to certain requests I made via court process. Finally, they just give up the ghost, and a few years later I received confirmation of discontinuance. I'm not saying my experience is/was/may be typical, but what I took from it was it simply came down to brinksmanship and them playing the percentages on their part. Play the long game, take good advice, there's nothing to be scared off and if it's anything like my situation, you may well win the day. The longer things went on, the more you will feel you're on the right side. Especially once it gets into all the process, form submission and involvement of the court, stick to your guns and follow the advice.  It's nothing scientific, but if every case was like mine, it seems like these folks have the view that at some point, the defendant will crumble and give in, through fear or otherwise, so it's important to stay brave and keep pushing forward because the further you go, the more it will tilt in your favour. Play a straight bat and the long game. I've now come back to post due to another situation, different debt, and will start a new thread in due course.   So keep your chins up, fight the good fight and good luck to all, and sincere thanks for all the help.  
    • The NTK needs to be redacted, your VRN is still showing.
    • Hi, yes they swapped over after a brief period when the bank were sending something over.
    • Fair enough. But I don't understand why they send these letters. Do people really get scared and end up paying them?
    • That's a blessed relief. They would have been withdrawn because, as I said, they have no evidence that you were driving. That comes from the responses to the requests for driver's details which you failed to send. The important thing is that the speeding charges were laid. That makes life much easier (and far more likely to see a successful outcome). You need to make your SD and serve it on the court where you were convicted. The next you should hear is by way of a "Single Justice Procedure Notice" laying the four charges against you again. You will have three options (for each charge): Plead Guilty and do not attend court Plead guilty and attend court Plead not guilty You must plead Not Guilty to all charges. In the section headed “reason for not guilty plea” you can state that you will offer to plead guilty to the speeding charging providing, and only providing, the FtP charges are dropped. This is a procedure well known to all court users (prosecutors, magistrates and their legal advisors) and is carried out up and down the land daily. I’ll refer to it as “the deal”. Before the pandemic it was necessary to attend court to undertake this deal and speak to the prosecutor (the agreement of the prosecutor is required as the court cannot accept it without that agreement).  However, during the pandemic courts aimed to reduce the numbers of people required to attend to an absolute minimum and most courts accepted a written request to do the deal. Local police prosecutors made an agreement with their courts that the magistrates’ legal advisors could accept the deal. In some areas this arrangement has carried on. In others they have reverted to the old process where attendance was required. So your offer of the “deal” with either be accepted in writing and dealt with under the Single Justice procedure or you may have to attend court. In either event it is important to emphasise that you will plead guilty to speeding only if the FtP charges are dropped.  There may be slight variations to the process depending on how the individual area works but there is no reason why this should not be successful.    
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

UKPC/DCB(Legal) 11+PCNs for privately owned van used for my Ltd Co. - PAPLOC for 5, gained Default Judgement!! - Parkhorse Shopping Centre, Church St, Hudds, HD1 2RT **SET ASIDE+CLAIM DISMISSED**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 389 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

How much is the claim for as stated on the Letter of Claim?

 

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

C'mon, we need to see the amount claimed and the PCN numbers.  Hopefully DCBL have made a royal mess-up again.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

All I have is a 2nd sheet with the 6 printed issue dates or as it says PCN Schedule.

It only has dates, location and "reasons".. No times.

I used biro to scribble out the amount, I thought it could be linked to me by them.

 

Also theye have only listed 6 PCN, and the £1760 amount is too much for 6, unless thet think they can charge £293 per pcn.

There were only 5 pcn listed on first letter... But a total of 11 come through as print offs with first letter.

Edited by mrk1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is everything always so complicated with you?

 

Why can't you simply read the upload guide and redact the important correspondence by using the free sites indicated?  Like everyone else.

  • I agree 1

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you remember, the snotty letter ridiculed DCBL for not being able to simply tot up the amount owed.

 

It's likely this is their reply to your snotty letter.

 

It's also likely that, yet again, they have screwed up with sums that a primary school student would have no problem with.  I think they use knackered software that can't handle multiple PCNs.  The same issue has come up on other threads.

 

But we don't know, because instead of following an upload guide that an idiot could use you've left out some of the pages and scribbled out important info with biro.

 

How do I know an idiot could do this?  Because I am a computer idiot!  Yet, incredibly, by following the steps in the upload guide when I first tried to upload something, I got it right.  Kudos to ever wrote the simple guide for dumbos like me. (edit by DX..:whistle:)

 

Everyone here is an unpaid volunteer.  We have a lot of people to help, and not much time to do it in.  There is a limit to people's patience.  You're getting legal advice, completely free, that would set you back £300 an hour with a solicitor.  I bet if you were forking that out you wouldn't put the solicitor to extra work!

 

So, conclusion.  Will you please follow the upload guide and let us see all the pages of the important letter that has been received, with all the important details, but your personal details redacted, using the free websites in the upload guide.  Not biro, not bits of chewing gum, etc.  It's up to you.  If you want to do something else, then I at least will bid you farewell.

  • I agree 2

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well,

The 1st and 2nd letters of claim appear to be identical (apart from the dates).

 

If the number of PCN's on the schedule is different (5 last time, 6 this time),

the fleecers are still unable to add up, because they're still claiming the same £1600 total amount.😅

 

I suppose it'll be good as evidence if/when it goes to court.

  • Like 1

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

Link to post
Share on other sites

First and second letter from DCBL

Sorry for scribbling out the amount in seconf letter they sent.

The amount is the original £1600 + 8% - So it is £1728.

 

The thing is the second letter is dated Jan 16th... I dod not receive it till Jan 28th.. So they are clearly mi printing letters or sending late?

 

Also I posted the snooty letter after the 16th so this 2nd letter is not in response to my snotty letter

combinepdf.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, mrk1 said:

Also I posted the snooty letter after the 16th so this 2nd letter is not in response to my snotty letter

I think it probably is a reply to the snotty letter, but they've lied about the date.

 

Usual tedious comment from me about being tied up at work, but I'll be on the forum this evening and will explain.

 

Their carpy letter however is good news for you and gives you the chance to delay things further.

  • Like 1

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

You'll probably think I'm making the following up - but I assure you it's all true.

 

In a case a couple of years ago DCBL prepared the Particulars of Claim for a parking company.  There were three invoices, let's say Invoice A, Invoice B and Invoice C.  Their PoCs were for Invoice A, Invoice B, and, er Invoice B again.  They tried to get the Cagger to allow a change in the PoCs.  The Cagger ignored them.  They blamed a software fault for the error.  

 

Recently in hitman126's case there were six invoices, Invoice A, Invoice B, Invoice C, Invoice D, Invoice E and Invoice F.  DCBL's PoCs were for Invoice A, Invoice B, Invoice B, Invoice B, Invoice B, and Invoice B.  They tried to get hitman126 to allow the change.  Obviously they were ignored.  They again blamed a software fault.

 

I think the knackered software tale is actually true. Their stupid system can't deal with multiple invoices. 

 

In your case the Letter of Claim was for ten invoices, but they only listed five.  So you ridiculed them in your snotty letter which arrived around 24 January.

 

I reckon they realised their balls up and got the tea boy to send a new LoC on 27 January, and once again the software messed up and they are claiming for ten invoices yet only list six.  It all fits.

 

(I haven't a clue why they lied about the letter date).

 

This is good news.  They can't really go to court without sending a proper LoC.  So they will have to send a third one and there will be another 30-day delay.  That doesn't mean they will give up, but it's yet more hassle for them.

 

You need to snotty letter them again.  How about -

 

 

Dear Yasmin & Jamie,

 

thanks for yet another Letter of Claim!  It's always nice to hear from you.

 

However, you do have big problems counting further than six.  Even a nursery school child could do better.  I'll explain in terms you might just understand.

 

You asked the nice man for money for ten pieces of paper.  But there are only six pieces of paper.  You made a mistake with your sums.  There is a very, very important man or lady called a "judge".  The judge gets angry if boys or girls do their sums badly.

 

To think that UKPC actually pay you to send out such utter bilge!

 

You and your greedy, money-grabbing clients also know full well that I had every right to use that loading area, and I can prove it, I've told you both often enough, but your stupidity and avarice stops the fact from entering your thick skulls.

 

Anyway, go for it.  Take me to court, even if the case is total pants and you can't even get the amount claimed for six PCNs right despite two tries.  A little clue.  Six times £160 does not equal £1600.  Time to practise your six times table!

 

Ho!  Ho!  Ho!

 

Yours,

 

COPIED TO UK PARKING CONTROL LTD

 

 

There's no rush, there's a whole month before you have to reply.  See what comments the other regulars have.

Edited by FTMDave
Typo

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, if the pre action letter has to match the actual particulars of claim, why not just let the fleecers submit their "flawed" claim?

Couldn't it then be defended and dismissed on those grounds?

Or is that too simplistic?

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Nicky Boy said:

if the pre action letter has to match the actual particulars of claim,

it doesn't.

however browny points can be gained by mentioning their failure to follow the pre action protocol in a court claim defence. 

 

  • Thanks 1

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you don't reply to a Letter of Claim they will take you to court.

 

Sending the snotty letter will at least delay them for a while.

 

If you want the matter to proceed straight to court then by all means don't send it.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course I’m going to send it. 
Is there anyway I can make this not go to court? 
Obviously it’s wasting their time. Because it was not me driving on any accounts. As we ha e already discussed. And they have broken the law. 
What about them changing the date? How is that allowed? 
What is my next move now? Just send this new letter in 2 or 3 weeks ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mrk1 said:

Is there anyway I can make this not go to court?

Yes.  Pay them £1728.

 

1 hour ago, mrk1 said:

What is my next move now? Just send this new letter in 2 or 3 weeks ?

Yes.

 

If you read this short thread  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/406892-highview-parking-anpr-pcn-claimform-urban-exchange-manchester-claim-dismissed/#comments  you will see someone go through all the stages of the court process.

 

You've been here a long time now, you know all about self-help and reading up.

 

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, FTMDave said:

If you don't reply to a Letter of Claim they will take you to court.

 

Sending the snotty letter will at least delay them for a while.

 

If you want the matter to proceed straight to court then by all means don't send it.

 

1st there is no WILL involved in LOC......understand why...

 

2nd i would, normally of course, agree with this stance upon the lines of -  in a typical speculative invoice thread, a LOC would be the 1st and only time a claimant could gleam any notion of how the person might react to a court claim, urm they've ignored my LOC, i wonder if they'll ignore my claimform , nice default judgement here. which is why typically one WOULD reply snotty wise.

 

i'm actually pondering, upon all the chess game to date, if it's necessary? are the claimant not already quite aware of the OP's stance?

a non reply, SPECIFICALLY in relation to this thread only, might be a better option IMHO. i don't have to jump through your hoop's, you already know i know that.......

 

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am tempted to agree with DX that the tactic of non engagement at this point may save mrk1 some hassle and make a small point.

 

However... from my short time on the forum, I get the distinct impression that the fleecers just run a conveyor belt production line of low cost, low risk PCN's, claims, etc handled by low paid staff who couldn't care less, and don't actually consider or take much notice of case history.

 

I personally think it makes no difference what the OP does at this point. The fleecers will carry on blindly.

 

Your call mrk...

Edited by Nicky Boy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's good to "disagree" from time to time and discuss what is the best strategy to adopt.

 

Thinking about it, I reckon you're both right.

 

This case is going to court.  No way will the fleecers just drop a claim for £1600.

 

It's probably a waste of time laughing at their mistakes in the LoC, all that will achieve is that they'll send a new one.  Better to let them proceed and show up their incompetence in court.

 

 

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...