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**

[brassnecked]

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

 

[mrk1]

This first one was £1600....

New one is £1760 or so, sorry I scribbled it out. Says it accrued 8%.

Laughable.

[FTMDave]

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

[mrk1]

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 January 31, 2023 by mrk1

[FTMDave]

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.

[mrk1]

I am wondering why I have not received any correspondance from eithr ukpc or dcbl about the snotty letter I sent off yet.

[FTMDave]

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..)

 

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.

[mrk1]

The amount was £1728.
£1600 + 8%. 
I’ll get the other page scanned in later on. 

[honeybee13]

Upload the whole of the letter please, as FTMDave asked, otherwise we can't advise you properly.

 

HB

[Nicky Boy]

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.

[mrk1]

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

[FTMDave]

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.

[mrk1]

Why is it good news? Because they’ve broken the law by lying to me aboit the date?

[FTMDave]

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 February 2, 2023 by FTMDave
Typo

[Nicky Boy]

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?

[dx100uk]

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. 

 

[mrk1]

Ok. I’ll send this off in maybe 2 weeks? 
And to ukpc also? 
Why would I alert them to their errors tho. Won’t they just manually get a list of all 11? 

[FTMDave]

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.

[mrk1]

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 ?

[FTMDave]

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.

 

[dx100uk]

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

 

[mrk1]

I appreciate your reply.

 

But a little unsure. You are saying I should consider now not replying to them any more?

Or keep with my snooty letter stance?

[Nicky Boy]

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 February 3, 2023 by Nicky Boy

[FTMDave]

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.

 

 

[mrk1]

At the end of the day they need to prove I was driving. Which I wasn’t. So surely it’s a done deal for me?