DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 102314--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Charge from DCBL 12 min Over Stay
By: b789 Date: December 13, 2025, 9:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You need to show us the N1SDT Claim form with the Particulars of
Claim (PoC) on it. We don't need to see all the other gumph that
came with it. Only redact your personal details, the claim
number and the MCOL password. Leave everything else visible and
we will then be able to give you precise instructions on what to
do.
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/9broxEs6SCxRYxxy9
#Post#: 102316--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Charge from DCBL 12 min Over Stay
By: Craig1973 Date: December 13, 2025, 9:36 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for such a fast response
Hopefully this works
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lC3t3TUURRW9d2phHuJBr5ULxxh70Rf7/view?usp=drivesdk
#Post#: 102381--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Charge from DCBL 12 min Over Stay
By: b789 Date: December 14, 2025, 4:57 am
---------------------------------------------------------
With an issue date of 10th December, you have until 4pm on
Monday 29th December to submit your defence. If you submit an
Acknowledgement of Service (AoS) before then, you would then
have until 4pm on Monday 12th January to submit your defence.
You only need to submit an AoS if you need extra time to prepare
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
Until very recently, we never advised using the MCOL to submit a
defence. However, due to recent systemic failures within the
CNBC, we feel that it is safer to now submit a short defence
using MCOL as it is instantly submitted and entered into the
"system". Whilst it will deny the use of some formatting or
inclusion of transcripts etc. these can always be included with
the Witness Statement (WS) later, if it ever progresses that
far.
You will need to copy and paste it into the defence text box on
MCOL. It has been checked to make sure that it will fit into the
122 lines limit.
[quote][font=Courier New]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 adequately comply
with CPR 16.4.
3. The Defendant is unable to plead properly to the PoC because:
(a) The contract referred to is not detailed or attached to the
PoC in accordance with PD 16, para 7.3(1);
(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.
4. The Defendant submits that courts have previously struck out
materially similar claims of their own initiative for failure to
adequately comply with CPR 16.4, particularly where the
Particulars of Claim failed to specify the contractual terms
relied upon or explain the alleged breach with sufficient
clarity.
5. In comparable cases involving modest sums, judges have found
that requiring further case management steps would be
disproportionate and contrary to the overriding objective.
Accordingly, strike-out was deemed appropriate. 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
due to the Claimant’s failure to adequately comply with CPR
16.4, rather than permitting an amendment. The Defendant
proposes that the following Order be made:
Draft Order:
Of the Court's own initiative and upon reading the particulars
of claim and the defence.
AND the court being of the view that the particulars of claim do
not adequately comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a) because: (a) they do
not set out the exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the
terms and conditions of the contract which is (or are) relied
on; and (b) they do not adequately set out the reason (or
reasons) why the claimant asserts that the defendant was in
breach of contract.
AND the claimant could have complied with CPR 16.4(1)(a) had it
served separate detailed particulars of claim, as it could have
done pursuant to PD 7C, para 5.2, but chose not to do so.
AND upon the Court determining, having regard to the overriding
objective (CPR 1.1), that it would be disproportionate to direct
further pleadings or to allot any further share of the Court’s
resources to this claim (for example by ordering further
particulars of claim and a further defence, with consequent case
management).
ORDER:
1. The claim is struck out.
2. Permission to either party to apply to set aside, vary or
stay this order by application on notice, which must be filed at
this Court not more than 7 days after service of this order,
failing which no such application may be made.[/font][/quote]
#Post#: 103208--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Charge from DCBL 12 min Over Stay
By: Craig1973 Date: December 19, 2025, 8:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
We have submitted that all now, as this was our first time it
was quite frustrating with getting a Gov Gateway ID etc but all
done.
What can we expect now do you think with your knowledge.
Many thanks again for all the help.
#Post#: 103212--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Charge from DCBL 12 min Over Stay
By: b789 Date: December 19, 2025, 8:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You can search the forum for any number of past and ongoing DCB
Legal issued claims which will show you the process and what
happens when until the eventual strike out or discontinuance.
#Post#: 105991--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Charge from DCBL 12 min Over Stay
By: Craig1973 Date: January 15, 2026, 6:04 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi Again
We have had this email, what should we do now with this.
Thanks again for all the help
Good Morning
Having reviewed the content of your defence, we write to inform
you that our client intends to proceed with the claim.
In due course, the Court will direct both parties to each file a
directions questionnaire. In preparation for that, please find
attached a copy of the Claimant's, which we confirm has been
filed with the Court.
Without Prejudice to the above, in order to assist the Court in
achieving its overriding objective, our client may be prepared
to settle this case - in the event you wish to discuss
settlement, please call us on 0203 434 0433 within 7 days and
make immediate reference to this correspondence.
If you have provided an email address within your Defence, we
intend to use it for service of documents (usually in PDF
format) hereon in pursuant to PD 6A (4.1)(2)(c). Please advise
whether there are any limitations to this (for example, the
format in which documents are to be sent and the maximum size of
attachments that may be received). Unless you advise otherwise,
we will assume not.
Kind Regards,
Litigation Support
DCB Legal Ltd
#Post#: 105992--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Charge from DCBL 12 min Over Stay
By: DWMB2 Date: January 15, 2026, 6:12 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Craig1973 link=topic=6696.msg105991#msg105991
date=1768478697]
what should we do now with this.
[/quote]
Unless you are intending to settle, nothing.
Await a copy of your own N180 (or check MCOL to see when it says
one has been issued to you), and then fill that in.
#Post#: 106139--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Charge from DCBL 12 min Over Stay
By: Craig1973 Date: January 16, 2026, 5:11 am
---------------------------------------------------------
DCB legal have tried to call my mother in law today, why would
they call if they are going to follow it through to the court?
We have not answered the phone to them or called them back.
#Post#: 106140--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Charge from DCBL 12 min Over Stay
By: jfollows Date: January 16, 2026, 5:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Do not talk to them, block their number if you can, hang up on
them if you can’t.
There is nothing to your advantage that can come out of talking
to them, assuming you plan on paying nothing. They just want
your money and you may say something to your detriment if you
talk to them. Everyting in writing.
#Post#: 106141--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Charge from DCBL 12 min Over Stay
By: Craig1973 Date: January 16, 2026, 5:18 am
---------------------------------------------------------
We do not plan on talking to them or paying any money to them
dont worry about that lol.
We are guessing they are calling to try and get us to pay and
not goto court. This is my feeling.
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page