DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 87968--------------------------------------------------
Response to letter of claim email (claim 2)
DIR By: TW-27
Date: September 1, 2025, 6:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi,
Please note, this is a different case to another I've just
posted about.
I challenged a letter of claim using a template provided on this
site and the attached email is the response I've had from DCB
Legal.
They sent photos of my car and printouts of the signage and a
map of the site.
I can prove I was in the tile shop the day of the alleged
offence with a date stamped photo inside the store.
Any further advice would he appreciated.
As I can't see the option to attach a PDF of the email, I've
copied it below:
Dear XXXXX,
WITHOUT PREJUDICE
We write to you in relation to the above matter.
To assist, our Client may be prepared to settle this case. I can
confirm our Client would be agreeable to £60.00 in full and
final settlement of this Claim. The current outstanding balance
is £170.00.
Should you be agreeable to this offer, please confirm the same
within 7 days. Payment can be made via our website
www.dcblegal.co.uk, by calling our office on 0203 838 7038 or
via bank transfer:
DCB Legal Ltd Client Account
Sort Code: 20-24-09
Account no: 60964441
When making payment please ensure you include the following
reference number, 711200237001SMP, to enable us to allocate it
to the correct case.
Upon receipt of the settlement sum of £60.00 we will update the
Client that the matter has been settled. If you are not
agreeable, we will continue to follow the Court process as
normal and issue a Claim without further notice.
Kind Regards,
#Post#: 87971--------------------------------------------------
Re: Response to letter of claim email (claim 2)
DIR By: jfollows
Date: September 1, 2025, 6:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/<br
/>tells you how to paste links to documents.
DCB Legal offering you to “only” pay £60 instead of £170 is only
going in one direction, just sit tight and you will end up
paying £0.
The “Court process as normal” means initiating court proceedings
but discontinuing before the fee has to be paid. Business as
usual and if you search the forum you will find lots of similar
cases.
#Post#: 87974--------------------------------------------------
Re: Response to letter of claim email (claim 2)
DIR By: TW-27
Date: September 1, 2025, 6:31 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks. I've read the guide and struggling to embed an image.
See if this link works:
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1HbqC5nUo4Q5HvlsfplrRoKSY8BwI_Fh4/view?usp=drivesdk
Are you suggesting I just ignore the emails now?
Thanks again!
#Post#: 87977--------------------------------------------------
Re: Response to letter of claim email (claim 2)
DIR By: jfollows
Date: September 1, 2025, 7:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The link works, thank you.
Yes, I suggest you ignore. Even if the next step is a court
claim - please post if it is - it won’t come to anything if you
stay the course.
DCB Legal has two tactics only :
- Take people to court and claim a judgment in default to people
who ignore the claim
- Take people to court with scary words and things like “CCJ”
who are scared into paying up
In general, anyone who actually defends a case finds that DCB
Legal discontinues before having to pay the court fee.
In this case it’s pretty certain they’ll give up and discontinue
in due course.
#Post#: 87978--------------------------------------------------
Re: Response to letter of claim email (claim 2)
DIR By: TW-27
Date: September 1, 2025, 7:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Okay, thanks!
Do you know if these threads stay active indefinitely?
I had my original thread a posted there a few days ago but
didn't get a response.
Just checking in case any follow ups are need.
#Post#: 92752--------------------------------------------------
Re: Response to letter of claim email (claim 2)
DIR By: TW-27
Date: October 3, 2025, 2:30 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi,
I've received this email in relation to this claim:
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KuIj6fbAMPwcA9GpF-lU-BIE4_dRAp5W/view?usp=drivesdk<br
/>
Please advise on the best response or course of action.
Many thanks,
TW
#Post#: 92769--------------------------------------------------
Re: Response to letter of claim email (claim 2)
DIR By: Dave65
Date: October 4, 2025, 4:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
They never surprise us and keep trying this one. The driver
cannot be chased "On the balance of probabilities"
"The notices issued by our Client asked you to either make
payment or, if you were not driving,
nominate a driver by providing their name and full address. You
did neither and as such you are now
pursued on the basis that you were driving as well as being the
Registered Keeper of the vehicle. On
the balance of probabilities, if you were not the driver, you
would have nominated."
An extract from one of b789 post.
"In law, there can be no "assumption" or inference that the
Keeper was the driver. The burden of proof is on the claimant to
prove that the Keeper was the driver and the only way they would
know that, is if the Keeper blabs it to them, inadvertently or
otherwise. The persuasive appellate case of VCS v Edward (2023)
put that one to bed.
#Post#: 92808--------------------------------------------------
Re: Response to letter of claim email (claim 2)
DIR By: b789
Date: October 4, 2025, 8:27 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If anyone wants to read the definitive reason why they can't
infer that the Keeper was the driver, even on the balance of
probability, then have a read of the relevant persuasive
appellate case of VCS v Edward (2023) [H0KF6C9C]
HTML https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/zra61px7l3if53o3bp9c4/VCS-v-EDWARD-Transcript.pdf?rlkey=bv4bba389nau5qpfglqkpjq5l&st=j76qly87&dl=0
#Post#: 92828--------------------------------------------------
Re: Response to letter of claim email (claim 2)
DIR By: TW-27
Date: October 4, 2025, 10:59 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the info here.
Can a suitable reply be recommended under the circumstances?
Thanks in advance!
#Post#: 92869--------------------------------------------------
Re: Response to letter of claim email (claim 2)
DIR By: b789
Date: October 5, 2025, 5:38 am
---------------------------------------------------------
No response needed. Just wait for the N1SDT Claim Form pack to
arrive in the post. When it does, just show us the main page
with the Particulars of Claim (PoC) and the back of it with the
signature of whoever signed it. Only redact your personal info,
the claim number and the MCOL password. You must leave all dates
visible.
If you follow the advice, you will not be paying penny.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 5
DIR Next Page