UKPC/DCB(Legal) 11+PCNs for privately owned van used for my Ltd Co. - PAPLOC for 5, gained Default Judgement!! - Parkhorse Shopping Centre, Church St, Hudds, HD1 2RT **SET ASIDE+CLAIM DISMISSED**

[mrk1]

I don’t want to sound like I’m not paying attention. But I assumed that’s what the Judgement of Claimant was? 

[dx100uk]

well in 24 pages of mostly your irrelevant ranting over 578 posts ...im sure ive explained at 3 times, a judgement is simply that - a judgement, its not enforcement,

 

to get bailiffs involved, they would have to return to court and ask a judge to send in court bailiffs or if they whish to use HCEO's, cross courts to the high court and ask a judge to allow their use. both of which the courts would inform you of the request and you get your chance to object. or WHY

 

neither of which has happened.

 

a fleecer with a judgement CCJ cant just send bailiffs no.

 

 

dx

[mrk1]

Thanks. 
They love using suggestive / threatening language don’t they on all of their correspondence. It’s unregulated. But that’s just how it goes. 
Anyway back on track. 

[dx100uk]

no they are regulated, but its the way the whole DCA etc industry works and always has since the early 70's and 99% of joe public think a DCA is a bailiff and that speculative invoices are FINES... neither of which are correct.

[mrk1]

I know I’ve asked this in different ways before but just need to Clarify if this hearing for 11 pcn invoices sides in the fleecers favour. I won’t be liable to pay their absurd invoices will I? And all court costs? I’m not in a position for any of it. 

[dx100uk]

of course you will.

 

there will be a judgement against you.

 

be under no illusion - as the judgement would be above the HCEO £600 involvement limit  - they will cross directly to the high court and get DCBL HCEO bailiffs onto you. and they wont give up and their fees will escalate, ok there is a total limit but it will probably add +50% to the sum.

 

theres no right of forced entry so...

 

but there are then otherways of enforcement they could try and now with the added bailiff fees too.

 

which is why everyone has tried and tried to make you focus on the claim with all the rhetoric and pointless drivel.

 

dx

[lookinforinfo]

If you stick to your task which is to show that you were not told when the case was being held  And despite what the rogues may say you did not receive the summons.

 

In the light of the number of PCNs involved it would be extremely unfair not to let me put my side of the position.

 

With the Post Office having strikes about the time  when you should have received your notice to attend Court it was perhaps quite likely that some mail would go astray or not get delivered And you may well have been unlucky with your mail because of the strike or the chaos that would have built up after the strike was over but the backlog and not been cleared. You also heard that a lot of mail was dumped in certain parts of the Country.

 

You are particularly upset by not being at the Hearing because you were very keen on attending since you were confident that you had a strong case which was helped by the mistakes by the appellant and their legal team. .But mainly the case would rest on the fact that you were never the driver and your vans were entitled to be there.

 

On top of that your vans were never parked there, they were unloading.

 

 

[mrk1]

ok all good points. 
Im obviously going for the hearing but if I didn’t or cancelled what can dcbl do then? Put a ccj on my file then what? Still go to court for some kind of right to pursue me? 
 

LFI - Your first point about not being told when the case was being held? I know when the case is being held? Can you explain what you mean. I’m probably getting mixed up. And about not being at the hearing. It’s a virtual hearing. I am there online. 

 

before I print my written statement out. I was going to add so e of these crucial points. 
 

like the mail strike. That may well be very valid. A lot of the points on there in numbers form. But I want to beef up my statements. Bur also don’t want to post it here as it is in case I let fleecers see my defends so soon. 
 

HOPSPOM vs Homeguard is on there. 
 

Any other external factors like post office strikes that I can add?

 

I think what I mean is, will the first question I will be asked:

 

‘why didn’t you receive the claim form’ 

 

If so I need one clear short statement. Should it be the post office strike action? I can’t find any strike action that coincides with around the date the supposed claim form was sent??

[honeybee13]

41 minutes ago, mrk1 said:

ok all good points. 
Im obviously going for the hearing but if I didn’t or cancelled what can dcbl do then? Put a ccj on my file then what? Still go to court for some kind of right to pursue me? 
 

LFI - Your first point about not being told when the case was being held? I know when the case is being held? Can you explain what you mean. I’m probably getting mixed up. And about not being at the hearing. It’s a virtual hearing. I am there online. 

 

We've already covered your first question more than once, I'm afraid.

 

LFI may be talking about the first hearing on the 11 PCNs which you didn't attend.

 

HB

[mrk1]

Yes I will read through back pages. 

 

Just a quick one... This is a pretty weak attack is it not from DCBL? - POST 477 PAGE 20 ON THREAD I posted a reply from them..

 

We note you have stated you were not in receipt of the Claim Form. Respectfully, DCB Legal sent you a Letter of Claim in January 2023 and a response was received from yourself on 24/01/2023. The Claim Form was sent to the same address in which the Letter of Claim was served. In the case of Link Parking Ltd v Mr David Ian Blaney & Michael Blaney (2017), DJ Pratt stated "it seems to me, on the balance of probabilities, letter(s) do not go missing as a matter of course, and, on the balance of probabilities, [the Defendant] would have received the letter(s)".

 

Oh? The worls is that simple and mechanical is it? 'Letters do not go missing as a matter of course' ?

Sure, it is logical and natural that letters arrive, BUT

 

I quote THE GUARDIAN (2000)

Royal Mail 'losing 1m letters a week' | UK news | The Guardian

WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM

---

Nearly a million letters a week are going astray, according to a consumers' group which has revealed the results of a Royal Mail survey.

"Nearly a million letters a week are going astray, according to a consumers' group which has revealed the results of a Royal Mail survey."

 

I QUOTE THE DESCIRER (2021)

"Back in 2017-18, over a quarter of a million complaints of lost mail were raised to Royal Mail, resulting in upwards of £4million being paid in compensation. And with figures for other major players in the sector not made public, the overall figures could be truly head-spinning.

However, with more than 15.5 billion items delivered by Royal Mail in that same period as the 250,000 complaints – it suggests that the percentage of items not making it to their destination is miniscule. While this is little comfort to those that do not receive their items in time – if at all – it does show just how efficient our postal service is in the bigger picture.""

 

How frequently is post lost in the UK?  | Descrier News

DESCRIER.CO.UK

---

With an average of over 14 billion items of mail delivered each year by the Royal Mail alone, it might not be all that surprising to hear that some things...

 

 

 

On 01/05/2023 at 23:41, dx100uk said:

been doing some work

 

here is the sar return for ALL 11 windscreen PCN's subject to the default judgement and set aside.

All 11 Windscreen PCNs inc notification letter+NTK+Photos.pdf 5.09 MB · 4 downloads

 

Just looking at some of the PCN - It literally says. "NO UNAUTHORISED PARKING" - Well guess what... I was AUTHORISED and I was NOT PARKING.

 

Another KEY POINT I need to make is that even if you look at the PCN photos, you can see the van is on a lower level, the rear door to my shop is 5ft up from the van ground level where van is. The access to this upper level was on the other side of the car park.

 

Usually loads where of 20kg sacks of old clothes, that's around 3 to 4ft in height. And sometimes 8 to 12 sacks maybe more. If I was loading / unloading in the morning, not only did I have to first walk 3 to 5 minutes from my van to the shop, getting the shutter open alarms off, lights on, walk to the shop basement, unlock 2 doors, but I also had to then spend spend around 2 minutes per sack to get them in the shop..

 

Then lack the back door, and repeat the journey back to the van. If someone was driving for me, the same applies with the loading and unloading.

This is time. AUTHORISED TIME I might add!

The PCNs show mere minutes, where is the proof this vehicle was parked and unauthorised?

[brassnecked]

Well there for the umpteenth time is one of the reasons you have a good defence to the original claim so long as you are granted the Set Aside, you need to stop faffing around Focus On The Job In hand.

[dx100uk]

you wont be asked any questions whereby the answer is already contained in your N244 submissions.

you might be asked to clarify something.

[lookinforinfo]

It is too much  to go through 500 pages but just to confirm -have you got a letter from the depot that you were authorised to unload there?

[mrk1]

Yea. From the company who owned the building at the time. One of the key area managers. I got him to email me a letterhead with his statement which in brief said 

‘This person was a tenant of the shopping centre between the dates these PCN and we had every right to load and unload. Whilst there was no set time limit for loading and unloading we let tenants use their best judgement’ 

 

Or something like that. I’m on phone. I can dig it out. But need to be careful not to give my defence up if fleecers are looking. 
 

This has been sent as part of my evidence along with form n244 and my own written statement.  
 

Why do you ask?

Edited May 3, 2023 by mrk1

[brassnecked]

If you could put it up as PDF would be good, that of itself should be most helpful.

 

[mrk1]

With pleasure.

Here it is.

 

WITNESS STATEMENT - PROOF OF TENURE AT PACKHORSE SHOPPING CNTRE -- FROM STEVEN MORAN (1).pdf

[mrk1]

I think I have some very exciting news unless I have read it wrong. 
I think DCBL and UKPC have seen the error of their ways and dropped charges. I’ve read it twice and pretty sure they’ve admitted I had right to load and unload and have dropped their attack. I’ll upload pdf. 
This does not mean I am not pursuing them for undue stress, loss of potential earnings and everything else!! 
 

[dx100uk]

You cant..courts are not there as hurt feelings police..

 

Dx

[lookinforinfo]

6 minutes ago, dx100uk said:

You cant..courts are not there as hurt feelings police..

 

Dx

 

[mrk1]

YEP 100% they have backed out.

Great work everyone!

 

2023-05-04 DCB Legal Claim Dismissed.pdf

[mrk1]

Thank you to everyone on here who has helped me out. Couldn’t have done it without you. I’ve learned a lot. 
I will seriously consider donating to the forum at some point in the next few weeks. Or if there is a private pot or whatever. 
Sadly these people will continue to wage their evil on unsuspecting victims but with forums like this they’ll surly have a very difficult time. 
 

[honeybee13]

What a relief! Well done everyone.

 

Thank you mrk if you're able to make a donation. There is no private pot, any donations we receive help to pay the costs of running the forum and we give our time for free.

 

Don't say goodbye though, you have other cases, don't you?

 

HB

[mrk1]

Yeah will deffo want to contribute. Be wrong not to. Will look at it later. Nearly 600 posts. Jeez. Must be a record. 
MrK Vs UKPC going down in history books. 

Yeah not finished yet . These are baby ones compared.

[FTMDave]

Yep, 600 posts.  I admit I got fed up in the end of the stream of at time pointless posts.  dx has been an absolute hero here.

 

Anyway, well done on your victory! 

 

The fleecers must have been beside themselves with glee when they got judgement and sneaked in all the Unicorn Food Tax as well as massive interest ... and now it's all gone wrong for them.  The heart bleeds.  Er, not !

 

You've still got work to do here though.  You still need to turn up at the hearing.  And ask the judge to make the fleecers pay your £275 costs.  You might get, it, you might not, but have a try.  I see the fleecers are trying to sneak out of paying costs in their run-away submission.

[mrk1]

I am overwhelmed by the determination of all the people who help on here! I Wiah I could give back but if I did all threads would be 500+ pages!

 

Yes, the fleecers definitely come to me with their tail between their legs, I could see their faces, they weren't happy.

I have the hearing in my diary and will attend with a CONSUMER ACTION GROUP print out banner behind me 

 

I have donated the cost to forum of the now returned cordless angle grinder I was going to use on any attempt to clamp my car wheel.

 

It is justified because they operate in the grey area of the law so I was acting justly to do the same.

Thanks to everyone! Seriously, mind blown.

I shall let you know how the hearing goes!

 

LASTLY...

 

I think what did it was the letter from the shopping centre managers... I got the letterhead from the area manager who stated

 

"This person was a paying tenant between these years and had the right to load and unload" (or so) but more specifically where he said "

 

I quote -

"Tenants who did not have permits to park in the covered service yard throughout the day were permitted enter the service yard with vehicles in order to load and unload deliveries.

 

We are not aware of there having been a set time limit on how long tenants had for loading and unloading vehicles at any one time, though there was an agreed process in place to ensure that any tenants who were in the middle of loading/unloading would not receive Parking Charge Notices"

 

Thank you all.

 

C.A.G 1 - 0 DCBL/UKPC