Author Topic: Letters from DCBL Bailiffs and DCBLegal regarding 2 x Unpaid Parking Charges  (Read 724 times)

0 Members and 36 Guests are viewing this topic.

Hi,

I currently have two ongoing notices of debt recovery regarding 2 unpaid parking charges. These are in regard to alleged contraventions at (1) Euro Car Parks (date Sep 2023) and a (2) Smart Parking (UK) Limited (date Oct 2024). I never received the original parking charges. I have changed numerous addresses over the years, and always updated my address on my driver's license. I did not realise however that I have to update the address on the V5C too, so I can only assume the letters got sent to an address I was at 8 years ago. See below for more info regarding each case:

(1) Notice of debt recovery regarding Euro Car Parks - I received a letter titled notice of debt recovery. I responded with an email disputing the contravention, telling them I never received a letter and can they please provide the PCN number, the full name of your client, the location, and copies of all letters sent as evidence.

I then received an email telling me they are no longer instructed by their client to recover the outstanding balance, and have referred the case for legal action to their sister company DCBlegal. I emailed DCBlegal, asking again for evidence, stating I can no longer contact their client, so that I can confirm the contravention. Soon after, I received a letter from them titled letter of claim, stating I have 30 days to make payment or or complete reply form and financial statement. I have not received any evidence of contravention to date.

(2) Notice of debt recovery regarding Smart Parking (UK) Limited - About 3 weeks later (04 Nov 25), I received a new letter from DCBL (same wording as ones for case above) regarding another alleged contravention. The letter was dated 23 Oct (I only received it 04 Nov) stating I have 14 days to pay (leaving me with 1 day to pay effectively).

This was another surprise, as I was a customer at the Pub at which the alleged contravention took place.  Additionally, on the day I parked at that pub, my mum and I were waved in by a security guard allowing traffic in and out.  I remember asking whether I needed a parking ticket, to which the security guard said no. I have not responded yet to DCBL regarding this notice of debt recovery.

So, I have two ongoing cases, both of which I dispute. Firstly, I did not receive original letters. Secondly, I cannot remember any contravention at Euro Car Parks (I used to park here frequently and I believe there was a 3 hour max stay), and at Smart Parking (UK) Limited, we were told we did not need a ticket.  I have evidence of payment at the Pub at which the parking was at.

Can you tell me if i have a leg to stand on here with any of the cases, or whether I am better off just paying the money?

Many thanks in advance for your advice.

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


Welcome to FTLA.

To help us provide the best advice, please read the following thread carefully and provide as much of the information it asks for as you are able to: READ THIS FIRST - Private Parking Charges Forum guide

Please also re-familiarise yourself with our House Rules. In line with rule #1, please use this thread for one of your cases, and start a new thread for the other. Advising on two tickets from different companies in the same thread will get too confusing.

Before you FUBAR this any more than you have done so to date, stop everything you are doing and sit on your hands for a day or so. Your first big mistake was even considering communicating with a useless debt collector. They are powerless to do anything except to try and intimidate the low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree into paying out of ignorance and fear.

Luckily for you, without even seeing the Letter of Claim (LoC) and the subsequent one you will receive from DCB Legal for the (not so) Smart Parking PCN, both these companies use DCB Legal to issue their claims and as long as you now follow the advice you receive here, you will not be paying a penny to either of these unregulated private parking firms.

The first thing you UST do, because both firms hold two possible addresses for you, is to send their Data Protection Officers (DPO's) and the DCB Legal DPO is a Data Rectification Notice (DRN) that instructs them to update their records with your current address for service and to erase any other addresses they may hold. The highlighted words are there for a reasoning you should use them.

As for the LoC you have received for the ECP PCN, you can respond to info@dcblegal.co.uk and CC yourself with the following:

Quote
Subject: Response to your Letter of Claim Ref: [reference number]

Dear Sirs,

Your Letter Before Claim contains insufficient detail of the claim and fails to provide copies of the evidence your client places reliance upon, putting it in clear breach of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims.

As a supposed firm of solicitors, one would expect you to comply 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 exist to facilitate informed discussion and proportionate resolution. You may wish to reacquaint yourselves with them.

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

Your template letter refers to a “contract” yet encloses none. That omission undermines the only foundation upon which your client’s claim allegedly rests. It is not possible to engage in meaningful pre-litigation dialogue while you decline to furnish the very document you purport to enforce.

I confirm that, once I am in receipt of a Letter Before Claim that complies with para 3.1(a), I shall seek advice and submit a formal response within 30 days, as required. Accordingly, please provide:

1. A copy of the original Notice to Keeper (NtK) and any notice chain relied upon to assert PoFA 2012 liability.

2. A copy of the contract you allege exists between your client and the driver, being an actual photograph of the sign(s) in place on the material date (not a stock image), together with a site plan showing the sign locations.

3. The precise wording of the clause(s) allegedly breached.

4. The written agreement between your client and the landowner evidencing standing/authority to enforce and to litigate.

5. A breakdown of the sums claimed, identifying whether the principal sum is claimed as consideration or damages, and whether the £70 “debt recovery” add-on includes VAT.


I am entitled to this information under paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c) of the Practice Direction, and I require it to meet my own obligation under paragraph 6(b).

If you fail to provide the above, I will treat that as non-compliance with the PAPDC and Pre-Action Conduct and will raise a formal complaint to the SRA regarding your conduct. I reserve the right to place this correspondence before the Court and to seek appropriate sanctions and costs (including, where appropriate, a stay and/or other case management orders).

Until your client complies and provides the requested material, I am unable to respond properly to the alleged claim or to consider my position. It would be premature and a waste of costs and court time to issue proceedings. Should you do so, I will seek immediate case management relief pursuant to paragraph 15(b) of the Practice Direction and an order compelling provision of the above.

Please note, I will not engage with any web portal; I will only respond by email or post.

Yours faithfully,

[Your name]

You can use the exact same template to respond to the LoC you will receive about the (not so) Smart Parking PCN in due course.
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain

Hi,

I received the below response to the letter you recommended I send.  Could you please advise on response?

"Dear Mr Alexander Mullen-Grigoropou

We write in response to your recent correspondence in response to our Letter of Claim (LOC) and will now respond as follows.

It is our position that the Letter of Claim (“LOC”) is compliant with the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (“the Protocol”). The LOC provides adequate information for you to identify the debt that our Client is seeking to recover. We would respectfully draw your attention to paragraph 2.1(c) of the Protocol and remind you that both parties are expected to act reasonably and proportionately.

For the avoidance of doubt, please note that the timeframe in which to appeal the Parking Charge has expired. You were given the opportunity to lodge an appeal when the initial Notice was issued to you. Given that the case has been escalated to this firm for recovery action, the time to appeal has now elapsed and payment of the Parking Charge(s) is now required.

The amount owed is a genuine pre-estimate of the losses incurred in managing the parking location to ensure compliance with the clearly displayed terms and conditions. Further, in accordance with the British Parking Association (BPA)/International Parking Community (IPC) Code of Practice, where the Parking Charge becomes overdue and before Court proceedings have commenced, a reasonable sum may be added for the debt recovery fees. The correct recovery fees have been added and will not be removed, for completeness we would advise that the fee is not inclusive of any VAT, as it does not pertain to a supply of goods/services between you and our Client.

To clarify, when parking on private land, the contractual terms of the site are set out on the signs. You are thus entering into a contract (by way of conduct) and agreeing to the terms by parking and staying on the site. Parking in breach of the terms as stipulated on the signage means that you are then breaking the terms of the contract.

Attached are copies of evidence pertaining to the matter, however, if there are any documents that you have requested, but that are not attached, it is because we have deemed the request to be disproportionate and/or not relevant to the substantive issues in dispute. We respectfully draw your attention to paragraph 2.1(c) of the Protocol and remind you that both parties are expected to act reasonably and proportionately.

You now have 30 days from the date of this email to make payment of the amount as per our Letter of Claim. Failure to make payment will result in a Claim being issued against you without any further reference.

Payment can be made via bank transfer to our designated client account: -

Account Name: DCB Legal Ltd Client Account
Sort Code: 20-24-09
Account Number: 60964441
You must quote the correct case reference (711200458683ECPL) when making payment. If you do not, we may be unable to correctly allocate the payment. If further action is taken by us as a result of an incorrect reference being quoted, you will be liable for any further fees or costs incurred.

Alternatively, you can contact DCB Legal Ltd on 0203 838 7038 to make payment over the telephone or online at https://dcblegal.co.uk/response/pay-online/.

Please note that in the absence of payment in the next 30 days, our position remains as previously advised. As such, should our client instruct us to proceed with further legal action, we reserve the right to do so without any further reference to you.

If you are at all unsure of your legal position, we recommend that you seek your own independent legal advice"

And what "evidence" did they attach to that email?

They are trying to shut down your “PAP non-compliant/provide documents” position by (a) asserting compliance, (b) asserting “appeal window expired”, (c) justifying the £70 add-on, and (d) saying they attached “evidence” but won’t provide anything else because it’s “disproportionate”.

Did they attach ANY of the following, and if so, which:

* the original PCN / Notice to Keeper (and any reminder letters)
• ANPR photos or windscreen photos
• a copy of the signage terms (ideally dated) and/or a site plan of sign locations
• a landowner authority/contract (or a witness statement asserting authority)
• a detailed breakdown explaining the principal sum and the added £70

Their “pre-estimate of loss” line is outdated/irrelevant in modern parking claims (they’re trying to sound authoritative). Likewise the “appeal window expired” point does not prevent you challenging liability pre-action, especially where you say you never received the original notices due to address issues.

So, the only thing we need from you right now is a list (or screenshots) of what was attached to DCB Legal’s email. Without that, nobody can sensibly draft the next reply because it may already be compliant (rare, but possible) or it may be the usual thin pack.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2025, 03:30:37 pm by b789 »
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain

Hi,

They did attach the original PCN along with the PCN final notification letter showing entry/exit times and ANPR photos. They did not attach:

• a copy of the signage terms (ideally dated) and/or a site plan of sign locations
• a landowner authority/contract (or a witness statement asserting authority)
• a detailed breakdown explaining the principal sum and the added £70

Many thanks,
Alex