Free Traffic Legal Advice

Do you still have the original notice to keeper - can you post it up?

No the keeper didn't appeal and the driver didn't receive the pcn

So sorry about that, I didn't reply and I never revealed who drove the car to them

Never, ever refer to yourself as the driver. Are you listed as the "owner" in the official "Register of vehicle Owners"... No you are not as there is no such thing! You are the Registered Keeper (RK). If you look very carefully at the front of your V5C registration document, you will see printed very boldly in capital letters:

THIS DOCUMENT IS NOT PROOF OF OWNERSHIP

Excel have (or had until you posted here) no idea of the identity of the driver. They only know (or knew) the identity of the Keeper. The Keeper and the driver are two separate legal entities and there is no legal obligation on the Keeper to identify the driver to an unregulated private parking company.

The Keeper should only ever refer to the driver in the third person such as "The driver did this or that", not "I did this or that"!

DCBL have absolutely nothing to do with this and you correctly ignored them. However, DCB Legal (a sister company) have now issued a Letter of Claim (LoC). If the amount claimed is not paid within 30 days, they can issue a county court claim for the alleged debt without further notice. You definitely can't ignore an N1 SDT Claim Form from the CNBC when it arrives.

For now, I suggest you edit your post to remove any identification of who was driving. Also, you can respond to the LoC with the following:

DCB Legal
Direct House
Greenwood Drive
Manor Park
Runcorn
WA7 1UG

By email to: info@dcblegal.co.uk

[Date]

Dear Sirs,

Re: Letter of Claim dated 22nd January 2025

I refer to your Letter of Claim.

I confirm that my address for service at this time is as follows, and I request that any outdated address be erased from your records to ensure compliance with data protection obligations:

[YOUR ADDRESS]

Please note that the alleged debt is disputed, and any court proceedings will be robustly defended.

I note that the sum claimed has been increased by an excessive and unjustifiable amount, which appears contrary to the principles established by the Government, who described such practices as “extorting money from motorists”. Please refrain from sending boilerplate responses or justifications regarding this issue.

Under the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims, I require specific answers to the following questions:

1. Does the additional £70 represent what you describe as a “Debt Recovery” fee? If so, is this figure net of or inclusive of VAT? If inclusive, I trust you will explain why I, as the alleged debtor, am being asked to cover your client’s VAT liability.

2. Regarding the principal sum of the alleged Parking Charge Notice (PCN): Is this being claimed as damages for breach of contract, or will it be pleaded as consideration for a purported parking contract?

I would caution you against simply dismissing these questions with vague or boilerplate responses, as I am fully aware of the implications. By claiming that PCNs are exempt from VAT while simultaneously inflating the debt recovery element, your client – with your assistance – appears to be evading VAT obligations due to HMRC. Such mendacious conduct raises serious questions about the legality and ethics of your practices.

I strongly advise your client to cease and desist. Should this matter proceed to court, you can be assured that these issues will be brought to the court’s attention, alongside a robust defence and potentially a counterclaim for unreasonable conduct.

Yours faithfully,

Save it as a PDF file and attach it to an email addressed to info@dcblegal.co.uk and also CC in yourself.

Come back when they respond.

No the KEEPER didn't appeal

ftfy
the driver didn't recive the pcn

Report DCB Legal to HMRC of suspected VAT fraud, probably in the £millions.

Respond with the following:

Dear Sirs,

You appear to be deliberately attempting to mislead me by stating that the added sum is a "contribution to the actual costs incurred by your Client as a result of non-payment."

Please stop pretending this isn’t your own debt recovery fee, which you keep rather than the parking operator. This ploy was first introduced by Gladstones when they began marketing 'no win, no fee' services to parking firms over a decade ago. This was openly advertised in the IPC newsletter at the time, with the first iteration being a £50 addition.

This is your success fee, isn’t it?

You are providing a VATable service to your client, so VAT applies to this fee. It is not part of the parking charge and has nothing to do with the so-called ‘work’ undertaken by one of your rogue private parking clients. It is your fee—your share of the spoils.

So, I ask again: why am I expected to pay your client’s fee for your VATable service, and why am I expected to pay the VAT element when HMRC has ruled that VAT on such a service cannot be passed onto a consumer because the service is provided to the trader?

If you are unable to understand this question, kindly pass the file to someone with the intellectual capacity who does. I expect a proper response, not a recycled template with grammar that indicates the author has yet to graduate primary school, trying to disguise this fee as anything other than what it is.

I suggest you try again otherwise this suspected VAT fraud will be reported to HMRC.

Yours faithfully,

[Your Name]

Wait for the N1SDT Claim Form to arrive from the CNBC and then show it to us. Only redact your personal info, the claim number and the MCOL password.

Good afternoon

I just received N1SDT Claim form with the other N9 parks.

I will appreciate your advise on the next step

Thank you all

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]