Respond to that Letter of Claim (LoC) by email to info@dcblegal.co.uk and also CC yourself with the following:
Subject: Response to Letter of Claim. Your ref: [reference no.]
Dear Sirs,
Your Letter Before Claim dated 3 June 2025, contains insufficient detail of the claim and fails to provide copies of evidence your client places reliance upon and thus is in complete contravention of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims.
I am the registered keeper of the vehicle. I am not obliged to identify the driver and I decline to do so. As there is no legal presumption that the keeper of a vehicle was its driver on any particular occasion, your client cannot pursue me as driver as per VCS v Edward (2023) [H0KF6C9C] (https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/yvxek3kfwtb3qent3lj6y/VCS-Limited-v-Ian-Mark-Edward-H0KF6C9C.pdf?rlkey=niecohfdtj1n1ysh5prbsp52p&e=1&dl=0).
If your client is seeking to rely on Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) in order to hold me liable as keeper, they are unable to do so. The initial Notice to Keeper was not received, as I had moved address and the V5C logbook had not yet been updated with the DVLA at the time of the alleged contravention. As such, no PoFA-compliant NtK was served within the timeframes required by paragraph 9(5) of the Act. Even if your client were to issue or re-send a copy now, it would be well outside the statutory period and would not remedy the defect. Your client is therefore unable to rely on PoFA to establish keeper liability.
As your client cannot pursue me as driver or keeper, it would be an abuse of the court’s process for your client to issue a claim against me and I will defend any such claim vigorously and seek costs in relation to your client’s unreasonable and vexatious conduct under Part 27.14(2)(g)
Because your letter lacks specificity and breaches the requirements of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (paragraphs 3.1(a)-(d), 5.1 and 5.2) as well as the Practice Direction - Pre-Action Conduct (paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c)), you must treat this letter as a formal request for all of the documents/information that the protocol now requires your client to provide. Your client must not issue proceedings without complying with that protocol.
As solicitors you must surely be familiar with the requirements of both the Practice Direction and the Pre-Action Protocol for debt claims and your client, as a serial litigator of debt claims, should likewise be aware of them. As you (and your client) must know, the Practice Direction and Protocol bind all potential litigants, whatever the size or type of the claim. Its express purpose is to assist parties in understanding the claim and their respective positions in relation to it, to enable parties to take stock of their positions and to negotiate a settlement, or at least narrow the issues, without incurring the costs of court proceedings or using up valuable court time. It is embarrassing that a firm of Solicitors are sending a consumer a vague and un-evidenced 'Letter of Claim' in complete ignorance of the pre-existing Practice Direction and the Pre-Action Protocol.
I confirm that, once I am in receipt of a Letter Before Claim that complies with the requirements of para 3.1 (a) of the Pre-Action Protocol, I shall then seek advice and submit a formal response within 30 days, as required by the Protocol. Thus, I require your client to comply with its obligations by sending me the following information/documents:
1. An explanation of the cause of action
2. whether they are pursuing me as driver or keeper
3. whether they are relying on the provisions of Schedule 4 of POFA 2012
4. what the details of the claim are; for how long it is claimed the vehicle was parked, how the monies being claimed arose and have been calculated
5. Is the claim for a contractual breach? If so, what is the date of the agreement? The names of the parties to it and provide to me a copy of that contract.
6. If the claim is for a contractual breach, photographs showing the vehicle was parked in contravention of said contract.
7. Is the claim for trespass? If so, provide details.
8. Provide me a copy of the contract with the landowner under which they assert authority to bring the claim, as required by the BPA/IPC Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP).
9. a plan showing where any signs were displayed
10. Photographs of the signs displayed (size of sign, size of font, height at which displayed) at the time of any alleged contravention.
11. Provide details of the original charge, and detail any interest and administrative or other charges added
12. Am I to understand that the additional £70 represents what is dressed up as a 'Debt Recovery' fee, and if so, is this nett or inclusive of VAT? If the latter, would you kindly explain why I am being asked to pay the operator’s VAT?
13. With regard to the principal alleged PCN sum: Is this damages, or will it be pleaded as consideration for parking?
I am clearly entitled to this information under paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c) of the Practice Direction. I also need it in order to comply with my own obligations under paragraph 6(b).
If your client does not provide me with this information then I put you on notice that I will be relying on the cases of Webb Resolutions Ltd v Waller Needham & Green [2012] EWHC 3529 (Ch), Daejan Investments Limited v The Park West Club Limited (Part 20) Buxton Associates [2003] EWHC 2872, Charles Church Developments Ltd v Stent Foundations Limited & Peter Dann Limited [2007] EWHC 855 in asking the court to impose sanctions on your client and to order a stay of the proceedings, pursuant to paragraphs 13, 15(b) and (c) and 16 of the Practice Direction, as referred to in paragraph 7.2 of the Protocol.
Until your client has complied with its obligations and provided this information, I am unable to respond properly to the alleged claim and to consider my position in relation to it, and it is entirely premature (and a waste of costs and court time) for your client to issue proceedings. Should your client do so, then I will seek an immediate stay pursuant to paragraph 15(b) of the Practice Direction and an order that this information is provided.
Yours faithfully,
[Your name]
1. Duty to Update Personal Data (Article 5(1)(d))
Under UK GDPR Article 5(1)(d), data must be accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date. You have now informed them of a new address for service, and they are obliged to update their records accordingly. Their obligation to retain a historical address for audit or evidential purposes (e.g. why the PCN was sent there) does not override your right to have your current address used for ongoing or future correspondence.
2. Right to Rectification (Article 16)
Article 16 gives you the right to have inaccurate personal data rectified and, where applicable, to have incomplete data completed. Their refusal to update your address on the basis that they used the V5C address at the time of the event is irrelevant to ongoing or future processing. They are now processing the data for debt recovery, and must use your up-to-date address.
3. Erasure of Old Address (Article 17)
You requested erasure of the old address, which can be justified under Article 17(1)(c) where the data is no longer necessary for the purpose for which it was collected. If they argue it is still necessary (e.g. for evidential purposes), they must retain it securely but must not use it for service or further correspondence. That would be a misuse of out-of-date personal data.
4. Legitimate Interests (Article 6(1)(f))
While they may rely on legitimate interests for processing, this does not negate your rights under Articles 16 and 17, nor does it excuse them from complying with your rectification request.
5. Misuse of Address for Service
Continuing to send letters or legal proceedings to the outdated address, despite being notified of the current one, would constitute unreasonable behaviour under the Civil Procedure Rules and also has Data Protection implications.
Respond to that letter/email you received with the following:
Subject: Data Rectification Under UK GDPR – Notice of Formal Non-Compliance
Dear Data Compliance Team,
I write further to your response regarding my data rectification request, and I must express serious concern at your apparent failure to understand your legal obligations under the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR). Your refusal to update your records with my current address, or to mark my previous address as obsolete, is both legally and procedurally unacceptable.
Let me be clear: you have now been formally notified of my current address for service. Continuing to process my personal data using an outdated address – including passing it to third parties – is a breach of your obligation under Article 5(1)(d) and Article 16 of the UK GDPR, which require personal data to be accurate, kept up to date, and rectified without delay. Continued use of an outdated address, despite formal notice, may constitute a misuse of my personal data and could be deemed unreasonable behaviour under the Civil Procedure Rules in the event of any legal proceedings.
Your reference to Article 6(1)(b) and (f) is entirely misplaced. The lawful basis for processing personal data does not exempt you from compliance with the data subject’s right to rectification or erasure where applicable. The fact that you obtained my previous address via the DVLA does not give you a perpetual right to rely on it once you have been notified it is no longer valid for service.
Your refusal to erase or mark the old address as obsolete also breaches Article 17(1)(c), as that data is no longer necessary for the purposes for which it was originally collected. While you may retain the historic address internally for evidential purposes, it must not be used for further correspondence or shared with third parties.
If this letter is received by someone who still cannot grasp your obligations under data protection law, I insist it be immediately passed to someone within your organisation who has the required competence and authority to respond appropriately. This is not a matter of discretion or internal policy – it is a matter of statutory compliance.
I also take this opportunity to make my position regarding DCBL or any other so-called ‘debt recovery’ agent entirely clear. I will not be engaging with them under any circumstances. I am well aware that they are not a party to any alleged contract, have no lawful authority in this matter, and serve merely as data processors acting under your instruction. As the data controller, you remain uniquely and solely responsible for the processing of my personal data, including any transmission to third parties.
Accordingly, you are now formally required to:
1. Update your records with my current address for service and confirm in writing that this will be used for all future correspondence, including communications issued by your agents or legal representatives.
2. Confirm that the previous address has been erased or permanently marked as obsolete, and that it will not be used again for any form of contact or processing.
3. Acknowledge your full accountability as data controller for all data sharing to date and confirm that my current address has been provided to any third parties who were previously given the outdated information.
If you fail to act on this request within 14 days, I will escalate the matter to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). I also reserve the right to pursue all available legal remedies, including seeking damages or costs where misuse of data or procedural abuse occurs.
Yours sincerely,
[Your Full Name]