DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 59295--------------------------------------------------
Re: GroupNexus invoice Taunton Deane South
DIR By: Oldstoat
Date: February 22, 2025, 6:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Ah. I just sent as an email. To info@. I did cc myself. Do i
also send it
#Post#: 66910--------------------------------------------------
Re: GroupNexus invoice Taunton Deane South
DIR By: Oldstoat
Date: April 13, 2025, 1:25 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Update. Received claim from HMCTS on 5th April. Case issued 2nd.
The particulars of claim are 1. Defendant is indebted for
parking charges issued to vehicle at Roadchef Taunton Dean
South. 2. The date of controvention is 29.6.24 and defendant
was issued a PC(s) by the claimant. 3. The defendant is pursued
as the driver of the vehicle for breach of the terms on the
signs (the contract). Reason Vehicle trmsined on private
property in breach of the prominently displayed terms and
conditions 4. In the alternative the defendant is pursued as
the keeper pursuant to POFA 2012 schedule 4. AND THE CLAIMEENT
CLAIMS 1. £170 being the total of the PC(s) and damages 2.
Interest. 3. Costs and court fees.
Now. When they increased the cost from £100. They added £70 as
legal fees. Now the £170 is described as damages. They have
also added Legal representative costs of £50.
My initial feeling is that at 3. They have not specified what
terms have been breached and with regards costs, they have
changed the £170 initially claimed as the PC and fees to PC and
damages, this is naughty. However. I am in need of being
assisted with a defence. Any and all help gratefully welcomed.
#Post#: 66944--------------------------------------------------
Re: GroupNexus invoice Taunton Deane South
DIR By: b789
Date: April 13, 2025, 5:44 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Without seeing the claim form we already know that it was issued
by DCB Legal and signed by Sarah ENsall. Follow the advice:
With an issue date of 2nd April, you have until 4pm on Tuesday
22nd April to submit your defence. If you submit an
Acknowledgement of Service (AoS) before then, you would then
have until 4pm on Tuesday 6th May to submit your defence.
If you want to submit an AoS then follow the instructions in
this linked PDF:
HTML https://www.dropbox.com/s/xvqu3bask5m0zir/money-claim-online-How-to-Acknowledge.pdf?dl=0
Otherwise, here is the defence and link to the draft order and
relevant transcripts that go with it. You only need to edit your
name and the claim number. You sign the defence by typing your
full name for the signature and date it. There is nothing to
edit in the draft order.
When you're ready you send all the documents as a single PDF
attachment (in the order of 'defence', 'draft order' and then
the 2 'transcripts') in an email to
claimresponses.cnbc@justice.gov.uk and CC in yourself. The claim
number must be in the email subject field and in the body of the
email just put: "Please find attached the defence and draft
order in the matter of CP Plus Ltd v [your full name] Claim no.:
[claim number]."
--- Quote ---
> [center]IN THE COUNTY COURT[/center]
> [right]Claim No: [Claim Number][/right]
>
> [center]BETWEEN:
>
> CP Plus Ltd
> Claimant
>
> - and -
>
> [Defendant's Full Name]
> 
Defendant
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------
>
> DEFENCE[/center]
>
> 1. The Defendant denies the claim in its entirety. The
Defendant asserts that there is no liability to the Claimant and
that no debt is owed. The claim is without merit and does not
adequately disclose any comprehensible cause of action.
>
> 2. There is a lack of precise detail in the Particulars of
Claim (PoC) in respect of the factual and legal allegations made
against the Defendant such that the PoC do not comply with CPR
16.4(1)(a).
>
> 3. The Defendant is unable to plead properly to the PoC
because:
>
> [indent](a) The contract referred to is not detailed or
attached to the PoC in accordance with CPR PD 16(7.5);
>
> (b) The PoC do not state the exact wording of the clause (or
clauses) of the terms and conditions of the contract (or
contracts) which is/are relied on;
>
> (c) The PoC do not adequately set out the reason (or reasons)
why the claimant asserts the defendant has breached the contract
(or contracts)
>
> (d) The PoC do not state with sufficient particularity
exactly where the breach occurred, the exact time when the
breach occurred and how long it is alleged that the vehicle was
parked before the parking charge was allegedly incurred;
>
> (e) The PoC do not state precisely how the sum claimed is
calculated, including the basis for any statutory interest,
damages, or other charges;
>
> (f) The PoC do not state what proportion of the claim is the
parking charge and what proportion is damages;
>
> (g) The PoC do not provide clarity on whether the Defendant is
sued as the driver or the keeper of the vehicle, as the claimant
cannot plead alternative causes of action without
specificity.[/indent]
>
> 4. The Defendant cites the cases of CEL v Chan 2023 [E7GM9W44]
and CPMS v Akande 2024 [K0DP5J30], which are persuasive
appellate decisions. In these cases, claims were struck out due
to identical failures to comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a). Transcripts
of these decisions are attached to this Defence.
>
> 5. The Defendant attaches to this defence a copy of a draft
order approved by a district judge at another court. The court
struck out the claim of its own initiative after determining
that the Particulars of Claim failed to comply with CPR
16.4.(1)(a). The judge noted that the claimant had failed to:
>
> [indent](i) Set out the exact wording of the clause (or
clauses) of the terms and conditions relied upon;
>
> (ii) Failed to explain the reasons why the defendant was
allegedly in breach of contract;
>
> (iii) Provide separate, detailed Particulars of Claim as
permitted under CPR PD 7C.5.2(2).
>
> (iv) The court further observed that, given the modest sum
claimed, requiring further case management steps would be
disproportionate and contrary to the overriding objective.
Accordingly, the judge struck out the claim outright rather than
permitting an amendment.[/indent]
>
> 6. The Defendant submits that the same reasoning applies in
this case and invites the court to adopt a similar approach by
striking out the claim for the Claimant’s failure to comply with
CPR 16.4(1)(a).
>
> Statement of truth
>
> I believe that the facts stated in this Defence are true. I
understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought
against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false
statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without
an honest belief in its truth.
>
> Signed:
>
>
> Date:
--- End Quote ---
Draft Order for the defence
HTML https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/zc23txk7poctyyxiv2ytx/Strikeout-order-1-a-v2.1.pdf?rlkey=pancly3z6zwqt2cra5rvvh3ls&st=nq7a58tz&dl=0
CEL v Chan Transcript
HTML https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/nb9ypbecuurpmln00dily/CELvChan-appeal-transcript.pdf?rlkey=7mpuvpmpe45s2zbhch21om1ez&st=i8dnbod3&dl=0
CPMS v Akande Transcript
HTML https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/y631olc61z1slr6xfrdsk/CPM-v-AKANDE.pdf?rlkey=kltpojedcxiwarxr0sdfyjo05&st=qi4lv3fv&dl=0
If you want an editable MS Word file with everything in a single
document which you can then save/export as a single PDF file
when ready to send, use this:
MS Word .docx file for defence [CPR 16.4(1)(a)]
HTML https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/krubcbnf27bsis66pq4yg/Short-defence-strikeout-CPR16.4-1-a-3.docx?rlkey=z87f3h8is3hgnp7sqr8plsz99&st=ldawlubu&dl=0
#Post#: 80246--------------------------------------------------
Re: GroupNexus invoice Taunton Deane South
DIR By: Oldstoat
Date: July 9, 2025, 8:26 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Have received the directions questionnaire, from the claimant.
Sneakily,they want a hearing on the papers only held at their
local court. I have filed our directions questionnaire, saying
want a hearing at our local court in person. They have stated
suitable for mediation. So I have agreed, (well tbh) the DQ did
not ask if I did or did not want mediation. It assumed I would
be having mediation.
Curious, about others experiences with this claimant. Are they
likely to turn up at a contested hearing or is this just another
hoop they are trying to get us to jump through.
#Post#: 80248--------------------------------------------------
Re: GroupNexus invoice Taunton Deane South
DIR By: b789
Date: July 9, 2025, 8:35 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Stop overthinking this. Every claimant puts their local court
and hearing on the papers. In a small claims hearing where the
defendant is an individual, it will always be at their local
county court.
You DO NOT want a hearing on the papers. It is NOT suitable for
mediation but there're using an old version of the N180 DQ and
mediation now is mandatory, irrespective of what you put.
Mediation is not part of the judicial process and does not
involve a judge. It is without prejudice and is a complete waste
of time, which is why when you receive your phone appointment,
you offer £0 and it is all over in minutes.
Ignore all the other forms that came with your N180. you can
discard those. Download your own here and fill it in on your
computer. You sign it by simply typing your full name in the
signature box.
HTML https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/673341e779e9143625613543/N180_1124.pdf
Here are the answers to some of the less obvious questions:
[indent]• The name of the court is "Civil National Business
Centre".
• To be completed by "Your full name" and you are the
"Defendant".
• C1: "YES"
• D1: "NO". Reason: "I wish to question the Claimant about their
evidence at a hearing in person and to expose omissions and any
misleading or incorrect evidence or assertions.
Given the Claimant is a firm who complete cut & paste parking
case paperwork for a living, having this case heard solely on
papers would appear to put the Claimant at an unfair advantage,
especially as they would no doubt prefer the Defendant not to
have the opportunity to expose the issues in the Claimants
template submissions or speak as the only true witness to events
in question.."
• F1: Whichever is your nearest county court. Use this to find
it:
HTML https://www.find-court-tribunal.service.gov.uk/search-option
• F3: "1".
• Sign the form by simply typing your full name for the
signature.[/indent]
When you have completed the form, attach it to a single email
addressed to both dq.cnbc@justice.gov.uk and info@dcblegal.co.uk
and CC in yourself. Make sure that the claim number is in the
subject field of the email.
#Post#: 94616--------------------------------------------------
Re: GroupNexus invoice Taunton Deane South
DIR By: Oldstoat
Date: October 18, 2025, 8:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Success
Followed the advice here. Mediation was offered. Accepted the
offer of mediation. During mediation we rejected their kind
offer of £165 and countered with an offer of £0. Case allocated
to local small claims. Received letter from claimant offering
to settle for £65.00 Counter offered with offer of £5.00, just
for forms sake. Next day received a notice of discontinuance.
Thanks for the help
#Post#: 94631--------------------------------------------------
Re: GroupNexus invoice Taunton Deane South
DIR By: b789
Date: October 18, 2025, 10:35 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If a defended claim issued by DCB Legal is not struck out, they
will always discontinue just before the £27 trial fee has to be
paid.
Did they accept your £5 offer? If you'd have stuck at £0, they
would still have discontinued.
#Post#: 94667--------------------------------------------------
Re: GroupNexus invoice Taunton Deane South
DIR By: Oldstoat
Date: October 18, 2025, 7:10 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
They discontinued, without accepting the £5.00 offered.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 2
DIR Previous Page