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.

Messages - Claimagainst123

Pages: [1]
1
Private parking tickets / Re: Starbucks, Stansted - DB Legal
« on: April 14, 2026, 08:50:43 am »
Hi All

I’ve had an email, following my response, that the claimant intends to take me to court

They have filled out an N180 form. I assume that I should do the same?

They have stated on this that form that the claim is suitable for determination without a hearing which I think I should be saying No to?

Thanks for any further help

2
Private parking tickets / Re: Starbucks, Stansted - DB Legal
« on: March 19, 2026, 03:19:20 pm »
Hi Jfollows,

OK - I did speak to them but said I wouldnt accept the offer unless it was £0.
They then outright asked me if I was driving which I must admit almost tripped me up - very confusing question?

3
Private parking tickets / Re: Starbucks, Stansted - DB Legal
« on: March 19, 2026, 02:53:54 pm »
I responded approximately 1-2 weeks ago.
I incidentally had a call from DCB Legal a few days ago asking to settle for the original cost of the fine.

Is this normal?


4
Private parking tickets / Re: Starbucks, Stansted - DB Legal
« on: March 04, 2026, 04:22:55 pm »
Thanks. AOS was submitted.

5
Private parking tickets / Re: Starbucks, Stansted - DB Legal
« on: March 04, 2026, 04:05:16 pm »
Hi, I've logged onto MCOl. Haven't done much more but i'll log on and then submit an AOS.

Do i need to contest the jurisdiction?

6
Private parking tickets / Re: Starbucks, Stansted - DB Legal
« on: March 04, 2026, 02:02:29 pm »
THanks for this, obviously, I wasn't entirely clear.

I have a claim form from HM courts..so I assume that I just append this response to the MCOL claim online?

7
Private parking tickets / Re: Starbucks, Stansted - DB Legal
« on: March 04, 2026, 09:52:28 am »
I did not identify myself as the driver

8
Private parking tickets / Re: Starbucks, Stansted - DB Legal
« on: March 03, 2026, 05:23:03 pm »
Hi,

Nothing in writing.

9
Private parking tickets / Re: Starbucks, Stansted - DB Legal
« on: March 03, 2026, 12:28:13 pm »
Hi,

I don't have a copy of the original PCN, honestly, this was circa 2024 / start of 2025 (to be vague) so I assumed it was not going to be followed up.

https://ibb.co/nqd7vScn

I'm going to say yes - I did contact them and start saying that I have proof of being a customer, so I didnt think this would apply to customers, obviously a mistake, but it was more a generic 'I' as I am dealing with the issue...

10
Private parking tickets / Starbucks, Stansted - DB Legal
« on: March 03, 2026, 11:26:13 am »
Hi There,

Thanks for any assistance.
Rundown is as follows,bought an item from Starbucks, has the bankstatements to prove, and then parked up for 12 minutes.

I saw some advice to ignore any letters.
I then decided to talk to Starbucks, they said nothing that they can do.

Anyway, then I got letters from DCB Legal - Letter before Claim, so I saw some advice to post the following:

"Your Letter Before Claim 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.

As a firm of supposed solicitors, one would expect you to be capable of crafting a letter that aligns with paragraphs 3.1(a)–(d), 5.1 and 5.2 of the Protocol, and paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c) of the Practice Direction. These provisions do not exist for decoration—they exist to facilitate informed discussion and proportionate resolution. You might wish to reacquaint yourselves with them.

The Civil Procedure Rules 1998, Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols (Part 3), stipulate that prior to proceedings, parties should have exchanged sufficient information to understand each other’s position. Part 6 helpfully clarifies that this includes disclosure of key documents relevant to the issues in dispute.

Your template letter mentions a “contract”, yet fails to provide one. This would appear to undermine the only foundation upon which your client’s claim allegedly rests. It’s difficult to engage in meaningful pre-litigation dialogue when your side declines to furnish the very document it purports to enforce.

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. A copy of the original Notice to Keeper (NtK) that confirms any PoFA 2012 liability
2. A copy of the contract (or contracts) you allege exists between your client and the driver, in the form of an actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location on the material date, not a generic stock image
3. The exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the terms and conditions of the contract(s) which is (are) relied upon that you allege to have been breached
4. The written agreement between your client and the landowner, establishing authority to enforce
5. A breakdown of the charges claimed, identifying whether the principal sum is claimed as consideration or damages, and whether the £70 “debt recovery” fee includes VAT
6. The full name and role of the person with conduct of this matter and their regulatory status/authorisation to conduct litigation

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."

I haven't seen a response from them. I chased them two months ago, no response, and now have a claim form from HM courts.
Can anyone advise how I take this forward? I'm loath to pay as I have bank statements indicating I was a paying customer.

Thanks

Pages: [1]