DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 58521--------------------------------------------------
National Parking Contol ignores Transfer of liability up to
court now
DIR By: gimpel
Date: February 17, 2025, 7:05 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi
I received a ticket whilst my brother of the USA drove my car
I made a transfer of liability to his address I received a email
confirming
NPC never replied like two month later I received the same
ticket as a new ticket with the same reference number I decided
to ignore as I already made a transfer of liability
A few month later I received a DCBL letter I called them up and
told them that I made a transfer of liability and never received
a reply they checked and said I am right they can see it on
system and they are unsure why it wasn't dealt with i can ignore
it and they will deal with it
Afterwards I received multiple letters and calls from DCBL I
told them what they have said but they answered that its not
their business they have a collection to make
I received a CCJ which I replied now Mediation is planned for
27/02/25
anything I can do or know?
#Post#: 58552--------------------------------------------------
Re: National Parking Contol ignores Transfer of liability up to
court now
DIR By: Dave65
Date: February 17, 2025, 9:00 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Just to clarify, you refer to Mediation and yet you say you have
received a CCJ.
Do you mean you have received a County Court claim?
#Post#: 58591--------------------------------------------------
Re: National Parking Contol ignores Transfer of liability up to
court now
DIR By: gimpel
Date: February 17, 2025, 10:54 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Yes
Thanks for correcting
#Post#: 58607--------------------------------------------------
Re: National Parking Contol ignores Transfer of liability up to
court now
DIR By: b789
Date: February 17, 2025, 12:12 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
READ THIS FIRST - Private Parking Charges Forum guide
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/
Please show us the N1SDT Claim Form you received from the CNBC.
Redact only your personal details, the claim number, the MCOL
password and the VRM of the vehicle. Leave everything else
visible, especially all dates and times.
The Particulars for Claim (PoC) are very important for us to
review. Also, what EXACTLY did you submit as your defence?
Do you have this in writing?
--- Quote ---
> "...they checked and said I am right they can see it on system
and they are unsure why it wasn't dealt with i can ignore it and
they will deal with it."
--- End Quote ---
Is DCB Legal the claimants solicitor?
When you've answered the above questions, we can provide bespoke
advice on how to proceed. Suffice it to say, that if your
defence is half way decent and you follow our advice, you won't
be paying a penny to NPC as they will discontinue before they
have to pay the hearing fee, several months down the line.
#Post#: 58700--------------------------------------------------
Re: National Parking Contol ignores Transfer of liability up to
court now
DIR By: gimpel
Date: February 18, 2025, 5:59 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi I've got a confirmation email saying they received my
transfer of liability
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 58711--------------------------------------------------
Re: National Parking Contol ignores Transfer of liability up to
court now
DIR By: b789
Date: February 18, 2025, 7:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
PLease show us the email confirming the transfer of liability.
Also, please show us EXACTLY what you put in as your defence.
#Post#: 58712--------------------------------------------------
Re: National Parking Contol ignores Transfer of liability up to
court now
DIR By: gimpel
Date: February 18, 2025, 7:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I answered this pre court case when I received first letter from
court
Hi
I received this PCN and I made a Transfer of Liability
straight away as my brother was driving the car the company
never
responded to the transfer of liability
I did receive a email confirming my transfer of liability
request
And I can prove that my brother was on my insurance from that
day
I used my other car which I had then
Instead of replying National Parking Control decided to send a
debt collector named DBCL (or similar)
When I received the debt collectors letter I called them up and
tod them that I made a transfer of liability request and
received
n reply they checked and saw that I am right and told me they
are
going to sort it and I can just ignore it
Therefor I do believe I don't owe anything
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 58713--------------------------------------------------
Re: National Parking Contol ignores Transfer of liability up to
court now
DIR By: gimpel
Date: February 18, 2025, 7:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I want to keep to my words that I made a transfer of liability
and they never rejected it
#Post#: 58719--------------------------------------------------
Re: National Parking Contol ignores Transfer of liability up to
court now
DIR By: b789
Date: February 18, 2025, 8:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
This is the legal position:
The operator (NPC) cannot legally pursue you as the Keeper after
you have complied with the transfer of liability process and
provided a valid serviceable address for the driver. The
Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) Schedule 4 explicitly
states that once the parking operator is notified of the
driver’s identity and address for service, they lose the right
to hold the Keeper liable.
You named your brother as the driver and provided a valid
address for service in the USA. Once the transfer of liability
was confirmed, NPC had no further legal basis to pursue you as
the Keeper.
Since they acknowledged the transfer of liability (via email
confirmation), NPC cannot simply disregard it because the driver
is outside the UK. PoFA does not state that a transfer of
liability is invalid if the driver is overseas. It only requires
that a serviceable address is provided.
The reissuing of a new NtK with the same reference number after
the transfer of liability suggests improper conduct and an
attempt to mislead the court. Continuing to demand payment from
you despite acknowledging the transfer is unreasonable behaviour
and forms grounds for a costs order under CPR 27.14(2)(g) for
their unreasonable conduct.
Having already transferred liability and received confirmation,
NPC should be estopped from bringing a claim against you. This
means they cannot keep changing their position after confirming
the liability transfer.
If NPC wanted to enforce the charge, they should have pursued
the driver in the USA. Their failure to do so does not justify
pursuing the Keeper when liability has already been transferred.
It's a pity that you didn't come here before submitting your
defence. Your defence raises valid points, but it needed
clarity, structure, and legal references to maximise its impact.
The court will be looking for a well-reasoned response that
directly addresses the Particulars of Claim (PoC) and
demonstrates why the claim has no cause of action against you.
The Particulars of Claim have serious issues, besides not
complying with CPR 16.4. The Claimant states you are pursued as
the driver (paragraph 3 of PoC). However, you were not the
driver, and you transferred liability correctly. The burden of
proof is on the Claimant to prove you were driving.
The Claimant cannot pursue you under PoFA because you named the
driver and provided a valid serviceable address. PoFA 2012,
Schedule 4, Paragraph 5(1)(b) states that once the Keeper
provides the driver’s details, keeper liability ceases.
The Claimant had the driver’s details and failed to pursue him.
Their decision to ignore the transfer of liability and continue
to chase you is unreasonable.
The Claimant reissued a second NtK for the same PCN, which is
irregular and suggests an attempt to mislead. The claim for £170
includes an unlawful added sum (typically a false 'damages' or
'debt recovery fee'). This has been ruled abusive in multiple
cases (Excel v Wilkinson [2022], Britannia v Semark-Jullien
[2020]).
You could submit an amended defence. However, this would cost
£303, although you could get those costs back if you are
successful. The problem is that this is never likely to ever get
to a hearing because DCB Legal with discontinue the claim before
they have to pay the hearing fee. There is no doubt about that.
However, assuming you are the first person on the planet where
DCB Legal don't discontinue a single PCN claim that is defended,
no matter how feebly, these arguments can be included in your
Witness Statement when the court orders one.
Even though the claim is now in litigation, you can still take
actions to put pressure on CPM and DCB Legal, particularly by
exposing their procedural failings and unreasonable behaviour.
Consider these options:
1. Formal Complaint to NPC
Even though NPC is an IPC member and the IPC complaints process
is worthless, a formal complaint to NPC is still strategically
useful because:
[indent]• It forces NPC to respond (or fail to respond), proving
they are non-compliant.
• It documents their breach of the Private Parking Single Code
of Practice (PPSCoP).
• It provides evidence for the DVLA complaint, demonstrating
that NPC ignored their obligations under the KADOE contract.
• If the case does ever go to a hearing, it shows you acted
reasonably and in good faith, while CPM acted unreasonably.
2. DVLA complaint:
Parking firms obtain Keeper details from the DVLA’s KADOE
system, which requires them to act in compliance with PoFA and
PPSCoP rules. Your complaint should highlight:
[indent]• CPM’s misuse of DVLA data by continuing to pursue you
after acknowledging the driver details.
• Their attempt to mislead the court by issuing a second NtK.
• Their use of a debt collector (DCBL) to harass you despite
already transferring liability.[/indent]
A DVLA complaint can be particularly damaging to CPM because if
they are found to have breached BPA rules, they could lose
access to the DVLA database.
3. Complaint to the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA)
DCB Legal is regulated by the SRA, and you can report them for:
[indent]• Knowingly pursuing an unmeritorious claim.
• Ignoring evidence of a valid liability transfer.
• Using litigation as a harassment tactic.[/indent]
The SRA takes a dim view of law firms using the court system to
harass people when they know their case is baseless. A
well-worded complaint could cause internal reviews at DCB Legal,
which might prompt them to discontinue the case faster.
4. Data Protection Complaint to CPM
You can send a Subject Access Request (SAR) under the UK GDPR,
demanding:
[indent]• All data they hold on you, including internal
notes/emails.
• All correspondence regarding the Transfer of Liability.
• Any communication between CPM and DCB Legal.[/indent]
This forces them to expose any evidence that contradicts their
claim and wastes their time responding. If they fail to comply,
you can escalate to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO).
5. Pre-Action Conduct Complaint to DCB Legal
Although the case is already in litigation, you can still send a
formal complaint to DCB Legal, putting them on notice that their
claim is abusive, vexatious, and unreasonable.
Demand an explanation as to why they are pursuing you despite a
valid Transfer of Liability. Threaten a wasted costs order for
unreasonable behaviour (CPR 27.14(2)(g)). Warn them that you
will escalate complaints to the BPA, DVLA, and SRA.
Would you like assistance in drafting those complaints?
#Post#: 58727--------------------------------------------------
Re: National Parking Contol ignores Transfer of liability up to
court now
DIR By: b789
Date: February 18, 2025, 8:21 am
---------------------------------------------------------
One other point... If/when NPC (via DCB Legal) discontinues
before the hearing, you can still request costs for their
unreasonable behaviour under CPR 27.14(2)(g). However, costs are
not automatic in the small claims track, so you need to take
specific steps to request them.
If they file a Notice of Discontinuance (N279) before the
hearing, the claim against you is dismissed immediately, and no
further action is required from you. However, you can still
apply for costs by arguing that their litigation conduct was
unreasonable.
Since the small claims track generally does not award costs, you
must show that NPC acted unreasonably. To do this, you need to
submit a Formal Costs Application to the court.
Even though the case is in small claims track, you can request:
[indent]• Litigant in Person costs: £19 per hour (as per CPR
46.5(4)(b))
• Postage, printing, and administrative costs
• Travel costs (if any hearing preparation was done)[/indent]
For example, here is a typical costs calculation:
[indent]• Researching defence & legal arguments (5 hours @
£19/hr) = £95
• Writing and submitting defence (3 hours @ £19/hr) = £57
• Responding to debt collectors and complaint handling (3 hours
@ £19/hr) = £57
• Postage, printing, and admin costs = £10
• Total: £219[/indent]
To succeed in a costs application, you must show NPC’s conduct
was unreasonable. Here’s how NPC’s actions fit:
[indent]1 Continuing to pursue the Keeper after acknowledging
Transfer of Liability
[indent]• You provided the driver’s details, which legally ends
Keeper liability under PoFA 2012, Schedule 4, Paragraph 5(1)(b).
• NPC knew they had no legal claim against you but still pursued
court action.[/indent]
2. Issuing a duplicate NtK for the same PCN
[indent]• This suggests a deliberate attempt to mislead or
confuse the Defendant.[/indent]
3. Harassment via debt collectors despite no Keeper liability
[indent]• DCB Legal confirmed the Transfer of Liability was on
record, yet they continued collection efforts.[/indent]
4. Filing a claim with no reasonable prospects of success
[indent]• NPC had no legal grounds to hold the Keeper liable,
meaning the claim was doomed to fail from the start.[/indent]
5. Discontinuing to avoid a strike-out or costs order
[indent]• If NPC only discontinues after realising they will
lose, this strengthens the argument that their litigation
conduct was unreasonable.[/indent][/indent]
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 5
DIR Next Page