Author Topic: UKPC Ltd - Private parking charge - Didn't register vehicle - TeamSport Karting, Stoke-on-Trent - Letter of Claim (Read 1078 times)

djavara · « **on:** September 22, 2025, 10:42:14 pm »

On Sunday 20th April 2025, the driver parked for 19 minutes in a virtually empty car park at TeamSport Indoor Karting.

There is no paid parking, rather it is a system where the registration plate needs to be input to a terminal. The driver did not do this. There is a sign at the car park entrance

and 2-3 additional signs in different locations within the boundary of the car park.

As the registered keeper, I have received nine different letters and I have ignored all of them (dates of letters all 2025):

From UKPC Ltd
1. The original “parking charge” with “discount” (24th April) (the reverse has my handwriting);

2. Final reminder without discount (8th May, inc. reverse);

3. Notice of debt recovery, with £70 “additional charges” added (22nd May, inc. reverse);

4. Final debt recovery notice, stating an incorrect parking location (30th May, inc. reverse);

From DCBL Ltd
5. Notice of debt recovery (9th June, inc. reverse);

6. Final reminder (1st July, inc. reverse);

7. Final notice of debt recovery (30th July, inc. reverse);

8. Notice of intended legal action (26th August, inc. reverse);

From DCBLegal Ltd
9. Letter of claim (10th September, inc. reverse).

Many thanks in anticipation of your kind guidance re: response or otherwise. Great resource.

b789 · « **Reply #1 on:** September 24, 2025, 01:10:33 pm »

You respond to the Letter of Claim (LoC) with the following by email to info@dcblegal.co.uk and CC yourself:

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 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.

Yours faithfully,

[Your name]

djavara · « **Reply #2 on:** September 24, 2025, 02:42:44 pm »

Quote from: b789 on September 24, 2025, 01:10:33 pm

You respond to the Letter of Claim (LoC) with the following by email to info@dcblegal.co.uk and CC yourself:

Many thanks to b789, and the wider team of mod(s)+heroes who divide and conquer, for helping me and all those who ask. You are each stars.

I have followed the advice and will undoubtedly return to paste the boilerplate response from DCBLegal.

djavara · « **Reply #3 on:** October 23, 2025, 01:53:18 pm »

Quote from: b789 on September 24, 2025, 01:10:33 pm

You respond to the Letter of Claim (LoC) with the following by email to info@dcblegal.co.uk and CC yourself

I have today received the response below from DCB Legal Ltd with attachments. The attachments consisted only of the original “parking charge” with “discount” letter (24th April) provided in my original post and a separate pdf of the 2 x photos and 2 x number plate close-ups thereon.

I will be delighted to take your further guidance at your convenience. Thanks in anticipation.

* * *

Dear (redacted)

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.

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Upon review with our Client they are open to settling this matter.

Notwithstanding the above, I can confirm our Client would be agreeable to £100.00 in full and final settlement of this Claim. The current outstanding balance is £170.00.

You now have 30 days from the date of this email to make payment of £100.00. Failure to make payment may 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 (redacted) 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

Sofia Marth
Administration Associate
DCB Legal Ltd

Tel: 0203 434 0433 | DX 23457 Runcorn

b789 · « **Reply #4 on:** October 23, 2025, 08:12:01 pm »

Respond with the following:

Quote

Subject: Response to your Letter of Claim (Ref: [reference])

Dear Ms Marth,

Thank you for your email and attachments.

For the record, you have provided only:
• A “parking charge”/discount letter dated 24 April; and
• A PDF containing two ANPR images and two number-plate close-ups.

These do not meet your client’s pre-action obligations. Your response fails to comply with the requirements of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (“the Protocol”) and the Practice Direction – Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols (“PD-PACP”).

1. Protocol compliance and disclosure
Your Letter of Claim does not satisfy paragraphs 3.1(a)–(d) of the Protocol or paragraphs 6(a)–(c) of the PD-PACP. Those provisions exist to facilitate informed discussion and proportionate resolution. If any of the items requested below have been omitted, please provide them. If you contend that any are “disproportionate or not relevant”, please specify which, and explain why with reference to the issues you say will be pleaded.

I therefore require the following:
a) Notice to Keeper / PoFA evidence
The “discount” letter dated 24 April is not a Notice to Keeper. Please confirm whether you rely on Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) to hold the keeper liable, and if so, provide the NtK you rely upon and demonstrate compliance with all mandatory provisions (including creditor identification, a defined period of parking distinct from mere entry/exit times, the para 9(2)(e) invitation, para 9(2)(f) warning, issue and delivery dates).

b) Evidence of the period of parking
The ANPR images depict moments of entry and exit only. They do not evidence a period of parking nor establish where the vehicle was stationary, what signage was visible from there, or that any terms were agreed.

c) Signage and contractual terms
Please provide contemporaneous photographs of the exact entrance and core-terms signage in situ on the material date (not library images) together with a site plan. Quote verbatim the specific contractual term(s) you allege were breached as they appeared on that signage on that date.

d) Landowner authority
Provide the unredacted, contemporaneous landowner agreement (or the full chain of authority) conferring your client with authority to issue and enforce charges, and to litigate in its own name.

e) Quantum and add-ons
Supply a detailed breakdown of the principal sum and the precise legal basis for any additional “debt recovery” sum. Reliance on trade-association codes does not confer recoverability. If you continue to pursue any amount above the principal charge, identify the exact contractual term relied upon or confirm that the add-on is withdrawn.

f) Person with conduct and authorisation
Confirm the full name, position, and authorisation status (under the Legal Services Act 2007) of the individual with conduct of this matter.

2. “Appeal window”
Your reference to an “appeal window” is immaterial. Compliance with the Protocol is not contingent on whether a trader’s own appeal process was used.

3. “Genuine pre-estimate of loss”
You assert the amount owed is a “genuine pre-estimate of loss.” That is incorrect in law. ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 confirmed that such charges are not assessed as liquidated damages or GPEOL. If your client relies on Beavis, please identify the legitimate interests and commercial justification said to apply and explain how the signage and circumstances here are materially comparable.

4. Add-on “debt recovery” fees
Your reliance on BPA/IPC guidance to justify a £70 surcharge is misconceived. Absent a freestanding contractual entitlement that was clearly displayed and agreed, such sums are unrecoverable in addition to the principal charge. Please confirm whether you intend to pursue any sum beyond the principal and, if so, the contractual and legal basis.

5. Settlement proposal
Your “without prejudice” offer of £100 is noted. Liability is denied. Until your client complies with its pre-action duties and provides the documents requested above, the claim cannot be meaningfully evaluated. If you intend an offer to be “without prejudice save as to costs”, please mark it accordingly.

6. Next steps
Once a Letter of Claim compliant with the Protocol and PD-PACP is served—including the documents and information specified above—I will take advice and provide a full Protocol response within 30 days.

If proceedings are issued without first supplying the outstanding documents and allowing that 30-day period, I will apply for a stay with costs under paragraphs 13–16 PD-PACP and invite the court to disallow any unrecoverable add-ons.

Please provide the requested materials within 30 days and confirm whether you rely on PoFA keeper liability.

Yours faithfully,

[Your name]
[Your address] | [email]

djavara · « **Reply #5 on:** October 24, 2025, 09:01:35 am »

Quote from: b789 on October 23, 2025, 08:12:01 pm

Respond with the following:

With huge thanks again b789

. I will revert with the response.

Free Traffic Legal Advice

Author Topic: UKPC Ltd - Private parking charge - Didn't register vehicle - TeamSport Karting, Stoke-on-Trent - Letter of Claim (Read 1078 times)

djavara

UKPC Ltd - Private parking charge - Didn't register vehicle - TeamSport Karting, Stoke-on-Trent - Letter of Claim

b789

Re: UKPC Ltd - Private parking charge - Didn't register vehicle - TeamSport Karting, Stoke-on-Trent - Letter of Claim

djavara

Re: UKPC Ltd - Private parking charge - Didn't register vehicle - TeamSport Karting, Stoke-on-Trent - Letter of Claim

djavara

Re: UKPC Ltd - Private parking charge - Didn't register vehicle - TeamSport Karting, Stoke-on-Trent - Letter of Claim

b789

Re: UKPC Ltd - Private parking charge - Didn't register vehicle - TeamSport Karting, Stoke-on-Trent - Letter of Claim

djavara

Re: UKPC Ltd - Private parking charge - Didn't register vehicle - TeamSport Karting, Stoke-on-Trent - Letter of Claim