1
Private parking tickets / Re: Small Claims Court Letter from DCB Legal
« on: October 07, 2025, 12:36:42 pm »
Thank you
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Pages: [1]
2
Private parking tickets / Re: Small Claims Court Letter from DCB Legal
« on: October 07, 2025, 12:07:36 pm »
Do I need to complete the section on mediation or just leave it blank on N180?
3
Private parking tickets / Re: Small Claims Court Letter from DCB Legal
« on: October 07, 2025, 11:46:08 am »
There dcbl has been calling several times asking me to negotiate with them and make a payment arrangements
4
Private parking tickets / Re: Small Claims Court Letter from DCB Legal
« on: September 16, 2025, 10:14:54 pm »
😆thank you I had forgotten to remove my name. Thank you for pointing it out I have removed it now
5
Private parking tickets / Re: Small Claims Court Letter from DCB Legal
« on: September 16, 2025, 11:39:07 am »
I parked my car in front of the building while I was moving furniture into the apartment I was leasing
6
Private parking tickets / Re: Small Claims Court Letter from DCB Legal
« on: September 16, 2025, 10:57:11 am »
Hello everyone
This was my defence below 👇🏼
IN THE COUNTY COURT BUSINESS CENTRE
CLAIM NO: M9KF4K6G
BETWEEN:
SMART PARKING LIMITED (Claimant)
and
(Defendant)
DEFENCE
1. Introduction
The Defendant denies liability for the entirety of the claim. The Claimant has no legal basis to pursue this charge, which was cancelled in 2021 after proof of authorised parking was provided.
The Defendant denies liability for the entirety of the claim brought by Smart Parking Limited ("the Claimant") for the following reasons:
2. Permission to Park Granted
· On 01/08/2021 and 03/08/2021, the Defendant was explicitly granted permission by the reception desk at St Martins Place to park his vehicle (SA15WMC) in front of the building while moving furniture into Apartment 309.
· The reception staff assured the Defendant that no parking charge would apply as he was lawfully offloading belongings.
· The Defendant relied on this assurance and had no reason to believe any contravention occurred.
Key Defence Points
(a) Express Permission Granted (Negating "Unauthorised Parking")
· On 1 August 2021 and 3 August 2021, the Defendant parked at Park Regis Drop-Off with explicit permission from St Martins Place reception staff.
· The purpose was legitimate: offloading furniture into Apartment 309.
· Reception staff assured the Defendant this parking was authorised and no charge would apply.
(b) Charge Was Cancelled (Reasonable Reliance)
· When initial PCNs were received, the Defendant contacted St Martins Place reception.
· Staff confirmed the charges were cancelled due to the permission granted.
· The Claimant’s 4-year delay in reviving the claim is prejudicial and abusive.
(c) No Breach of Contract (Signs vs. Actual Authority)
· The Claimant’s signs cannot override express permission given by the site’s authorised staff.
· The Defendant did not see/agree to any terms imposing £100+ penalties (Vine v Waltham Forest LBC [2000]).
(d) POFA 2012 Non-Compliance (Keeper Liability Invalid)
· The Claimant has provided no evidence of complying with Schedule 4 of POFA 2012, including:
· Serving a valid "Notice to Keeper" within 14 days of the alleged contravention.
· Including mandatory POFA wording in correspondence.
(e) Excessive and Unenforceable Charge (Penalty Rule)
· £340 is disproportionate to any loss (parking was free/unmonitored).
· "Damages" and 8% interest are not recoverable under contract law (ParkingEye v Beavis [2015]).
3. Abuse of Process
· Pursuing a claim 4 years later after cancellation assurance violates the Defendant’s right to a fair trial (CPR 1.1).
· DCB Legal has no cause of action given the prior cancellation.
4. Defendant’s Request
The Court is asked to:
· Strike out the claim in its entirety under CPR 3.4.
· Award the Defendant’s costs for defending this claim.
This was my defence below 👇🏼
IN THE COUNTY COURT BUSINESS CENTRE
CLAIM NO: M9KF4K6G
BETWEEN:
SMART PARKING LIMITED (Claimant)
and
(Defendant)
DEFENCE
1. Introduction
The Defendant denies liability for the entirety of the claim. The Claimant has no legal basis to pursue this charge, which was cancelled in 2021 after proof of authorised parking was provided.
The Defendant denies liability for the entirety of the claim brought by Smart Parking Limited ("the Claimant") for the following reasons:
2. Permission to Park Granted
· On 01/08/2021 and 03/08/2021, the Defendant was explicitly granted permission by the reception desk at St Martins Place to park his vehicle (SA15WMC) in front of the building while moving furniture into Apartment 309.
· The reception staff assured the Defendant that no parking charge would apply as he was lawfully offloading belongings.
· The Defendant relied on this assurance and had no reason to believe any contravention occurred.
Key Defence Points
(a) Express Permission Granted (Negating "Unauthorised Parking")
· On 1 August 2021 and 3 August 2021, the Defendant parked at Park Regis Drop-Off with explicit permission from St Martins Place reception staff.
· The purpose was legitimate: offloading furniture into Apartment 309.
· Reception staff assured the Defendant this parking was authorised and no charge would apply.
(b) Charge Was Cancelled (Reasonable Reliance)
· When initial PCNs were received, the Defendant contacted St Martins Place reception.
· Staff confirmed the charges were cancelled due to the permission granted.
· The Claimant’s 4-year delay in reviving the claim is prejudicial and abusive.
(c) No Breach of Contract (Signs vs. Actual Authority)
· The Claimant’s signs cannot override express permission given by the site’s authorised staff.
· The Defendant did not see/agree to any terms imposing £100+ penalties (Vine v Waltham Forest LBC [2000]).
(d) POFA 2012 Non-Compliance (Keeper Liability Invalid)
· The Claimant has provided no evidence of complying with Schedule 4 of POFA 2012, including:
· Serving a valid "Notice to Keeper" within 14 days of the alleged contravention.
· Including mandatory POFA wording in correspondence.
(e) Excessive and Unenforceable Charge (Penalty Rule)
· £340 is disproportionate to any loss (parking was free/unmonitored).
· "Damages" and 8% interest are not recoverable under contract law (ParkingEye v Beavis [2015]).
3. Abuse of Process
· Pursuing a claim 4 years later after cancellation assurance violates the Defendant’s right to a fair trial (CPR 1.1).
· DCB Legal has no cause of action given the prior cancellation.
4. Defendant’s Request
The Court is asked to:
· Strike out the claim in its entirety under CPR 3.4.
· Award the Defendant’s costs for defending this claim.
7
Private parking tickets / Small Claims Court Letter from DCB Legal
« on: September 15, 2025, 05:09:34 pm »
Hello
I received a small claims court letter initiated by dcb legal. I replied the letter and filed with the courts denying the claim
I have received the following email from dcb legal 👇🏼
Good Morning
Having reviewed the content of your defence, we write to inform you that our client intends to proceed with the claim.
In due course, the Court will direct both parties to each file a directions questionnaire. In preparation for that, please find attached a copy of the Claimant's, which we confirm has been filed with the Court.
Without Prejudice to the above, in order to assist the Court in achieving its overriding objective, our client may be prepared to settle this case - in the event you wish to discuss settlement, please call us on 0203 434 0433 within 7 days and make immediate reference to this correspondence.
If you have provided an email address within your Defence, we intend to use it for service of documents (usually in PDF format) hereon in pursuant to PD 6A (4.1)(2)(c). Please advise whether there are any limitations to this (for example, the format in which documents are to be sent and the maximum size of attachments that may be received). Unless you advise otherwise, we will assume not.
Kind Regards,
Litigation Support
DCB Legal Ltd
Tel: 0203 838 7038 | DX 23457 Runcorn
Please advise me on fighting this claim
I received a small claims court letter initiated by dcb legal. I replied the letter and filed with the courts denying the claim
I have received the following email from dcb legal 👇🏼
Good Morning
Having reviewed the content of your defence, we write to inform you that our client intends to proceed with the claim.
In due course, the Court will direct both parties to each file a directions questionnaire. In preparation for that, please find attached a copy of the Claimant's, which we confirm has been filed with the Court.
Without Prejudice to the above, in order to assist the Court in achieving its overriding objective, our client may be prepared to settle this case - in the event you wish to discuss settlement, please call us on 0203 434 0433 within 7 days and make immediate reference to this correspondence.
If you have provided an email address within your Defence, we intend to use it for service of documents (usually in PDF format) hereon in pursuant to PD 6A (4.1)(2)(c). Please advise whether there are any limitations to this (for example, the format in which documents are to be sent and the maximum size of attachments that may be received). Unless you advise otherwise, we will assume not.
Kind Regards,
Litigation Support
DCB Legal Ltd
Tel: 0203 838 7038 | DX 23457 Runcorn
Please advise me on fighting this claim
Pages: [1]