DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 91199--------------------------------------------------
Re: Letter of Claim - DCB Legal
By: DWMB2 Date: September 23, 2025, 4:43 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=helenwhite00 link=topic=6980.msg91197#msg91197
date=1758663749]
So first thing is can someone advise how I can attach?
[/quote]
See this guide: READ THIS FIRST - Private Parking Charges Forum
guide
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/
#Post#: 91200--------------------------------------------------
Re: Letter of Claim - DCB Legal
By: helenwhite00 Date: September 23, 2025, 4:50 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you and claim form / link to it
HTML https://imgur.com/a/v9lQiPY
HTML https://imgur.com/a/v9lQiPY
If forum could help me with what I should put for my defence
(and do I tick the box I am disputing it as already paid as in
that case you just add the payment details and don’t fill in the
other defence section?)
Also I best to do it online or fill in the paper forms and send
back?
Thanks,
Helen
#Post#: 91250--------------------------------------------------
Re: Letter of Claim - DCB Legal
By: b789 Date: September 24, 2025, 6:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
With an issue date of 16th September you have until 4pm on
Monday 6th October to submit your defence. If you submit an
Acknowledgement of Service (AoS) before then, you would then
have until 4pm on Monday 20th October 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
DO NOT use the paper forms in the claim pack.
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#: 91669--------------------------------------------------
Re: Letter of Claim - DCB Legal
By: helenwhite00 Date: September 26, 2025, 12:03 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for the information and I will use it and submit the
electronic form this weekend.
I did have one question, should I not put anywhere in the
defence that I have already actually paid £100 as if it did go
any further I would want to use that…?
Thanks,
Helen
#Post#: 91699--------------------------------------------------
Re: Letter of Claim - DCB Legal
By: b789 Date: September 27, 2025, 5:55 am
---------------------------------------------------------
No need, at this point. This will never get as far as a hearing.
If it ever did, which it won't, they would have to give a
witness statement which is where you can challenge anything they
claim. For now, the Particulars of Claim (PoC) are defective.
The PoC must give a concise reason for the claim and you must be
able to understand the claim fully from those PoC. You have to
imagine that you know nothing at all about this claim and the
very first you know about it is the PoC.
They cannot argue that you should have known about it from
previous correspondence. The actual PoC must give enough
information for you to be able to plead a defence. If you read
the defence provided (authored with the assistance of a long
serving district judge) you will see that the only defence that
can be made is that a proper defence cannot be pleaded because
of the defective PoC which are in breach of CPR 16.4.
These bulk litigation companies could, if they wanted to, submit
further more detailed PoC within 14 days of service of the
claim. They choose not to. They are relying on the hope that you
are low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree and can be
intimidated into paying up out of ignorance and fear. Sadly, the
vast majority of recipients of a claim will either bury their
heads in the sand or screw up on how to respond and the Claimant
gets a judgement in default. These bulk litigators issue
hundreds of thousands of these small claims every year.
Of the minority of cases that manage to find their way here for
advice, preferably before any response has been made, we
successfully advise almost every single one to a successful
conclusion. In the majority of cases, it ends with a
discontinuation. Some are struck out and of the very few that
ever get as far as a hearing in front of a judge, most of those
are won.
So, for now, just do as advised and if it ever gets to the point
you need to mention the fact that you paid £100, I will eat my
hat and assist you on how to put that point across in your
witness statement.
Can you please confirm whether the N1SDT Claim Form with the PoC
was signed by Sarah Ensall as 'Head of Legal'? IF so, I have
further advice for you which will put DCB Legal on the back
foot. She is not authorised to conduct litigation and is in
breach of the Legal Services Act 2007, which is a criminal
offence. You can require them to cure the defect by having the
claim reissued once signed by someone who is authorised to
conduct litigation and also report them to the SRA for the LSA
breach. This is all due to a very recent binding high court
appeal case that finally confirmed that anyone conducting
litigation must be authorised, as it is a reserved legal
activity. Up until now, these firms have been using unauthorised
individuals who think that they can conduct litigation under the
supervision of their solicitor. They cannot.
#Post#: 91771--------------------------------------------------
Re: Letter of Claim - DCB Legal
By: helenwhite00 Date: September 27, 2025, 3:15 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you and yes the claim is signed as per link below by Sarah
Ensall:
HTML https://imgur.com/a/umyJS2Y
Also I have gone to look at the claim online, also picture
should be in above link, as online portal does not seem to
recognise claim number.
Does this mean I need to submit paper forms and if so can I
submit a separate sheet fr defence so I can copy and paste
information directly from your post?
Thanks,
Helen
#Post#: 91801--------------------------------------------------
Re: Letter of Claim - DCB Legal
By: b789 Date: September 28, 2025, 5:31 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If you cannot get into your MCOL portal, then follow the
following advice:
Here is the defence and link to the draft order that goes 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 combine both documents as a single PDF
attachment and send as an attachment in an email to
claimresponses.cnbc[member=6517]justice[/member].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 [claimant] v [your full
name] Claim no.: [claim number]."
[quote][center]IN THE COUNTY COURT[/center]
[right]Claim No: [Claim Number][/right]
[center]BETWEEN:
Euro Car Parks Ltd
Claimant
- and -
[Defendant's Full Name]

Defendant
[hr]
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.
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 16.7.3(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.[/indent]
4. 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.
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) Adequately 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]
5. 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.
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:[/quote]
Draft Order for the defence
HTML https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/tcewefk7daozuje25chkl/Strikeout-order-v2.pdf?rlkey=wxnymo8mwcma2jj8xihjm7pdx&st=nbtf0cn6&dl=0
As for the fact that the Claim Form has been signed by an
unauthorised person, send the following email to
info@dcblegal.co.uk and CC yourself:
[quote]Subject: Claim [claim number] – N1SDT Claim Form signed
by 'Head of Legal', authority to conduct litigation
Dear Sir/Madam,
I refer to the Claim Form with the Particulars of Claim (Form
N1SDT) filed/served in this claim. It is signed “Sarah Ensall”,
position “Head of Legal”, and purports to be signed on behalf of
the claimant’s solicitor.
Please confirm by return:
Ms Ensall's, capacity, and whether they are an authorised person
within the meaning of the Legal Services Act 2007 with current
rights to conduct litigation (provide SRA/CILEX number and
practising status). If not authorised,
The precise exemption relied upon under Schedule 3 of the Legal
Services Act 2007 that permits that individual to conduct
litigation and sign the NSDT in these proceedings (enclose the
sealed court order or the specific statutory provision, as
applicable).
For the avoidance of doubt:
• Preparing, signing, filing or serving an N1SDT is conduct of
litigation.
• Following Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP, unqualified
employees may assist but cannot themselves conduct litigation
unless authorised or exempt.
Action required:
• Confirm the above within 7 days.
• If the document was not signed by an authorised (or exempt)
person, file and serve a compliant N1SDT personally signed by an
authorised person, with their full name clearly stated.
Costs and regulatory notice:
If the N1SDT was signed by a person not authorised or exempt, or
must be re-filed/served to correct the signer’s identity/status,
I, as a litigant in person, will treat this as unreasonable
conduct. In line with Mazur and CPR 27.14(2)(g), I will invite
the Court, in its discretion, to order the claimant to pay the
defendant’s costs caused by your firm’s irregular conduct and,
if appropriate, to consider wasted costs against
representatives.
Further, conducting a reserved legal activity without
entitlement is a criminal offence under the Legal Services Act
2007. If any unauthorised conduct of litigation has occurred, I
will report the matter to the SRA without further notice and
reserve all rights to place this correspondence before the
Court.
Yours faithfully,
[Full name]
[Postal address]
[Email][/quote]
#Post#: 91891--------------------------------------------------
Re: Letter of Claim - DCB Legal
By: helenwhite00 Date: September 28, 2025, 7:03 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks again for the information and as I don’t have a PDF
scanner have found the online version of N9B form that I assume
I can use:
[img]
HTML https://www.moneyclaimsuk.co.uk/PDFForms/N9B.pdf[/img]
Then I fill this in and include along with defence form that I
sign as above and convert to PDF.
Thanks,
Helen
#Post#: 91932--------------------------------------------------
Re: Letter of Claim - DCB Legal
By: b789 Date: September 29, 2025, 5:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
NO!!! You don't need any "scanner"!
Create the defence as a PDF file. You can use something like
Word or (if on a Mac) Pages, or any basic word processor to copy
and paste what I provided above and just fill in the
placeholders where necessary with your full name and the claim
number. The draft order I linked to does not require any editing
and is already in PDF format.
There is no ned to sign anything being submitted electronically.
Simply typing your full name for the signature is sufficient.
When you have edited the defence as necessary, simply save it or
export it as a PDF file. Then, you simply email to the address
provided with both those PDF files (the defence and the draft
order) attached to the email. End of!
Ideally, you should try and merge both PDF files into a single
PDF but if you don't know how, then as two separate documents
will not matter too much.
#Post#: 92256--------------------------------------------------
Re: Letter of Claim - DCB Legal
By: helenwhite00 Date: September 30, 2025, 5:22 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Ok think I got it.
I have created a PDF of the defence provided and just added info
advised such as claim number and signature.
Then I have combined this with the draft order that did not need
any updates and mailed PDF as per instructions.
I have also mailed DCB legal re. authority to conduct
litigation.
Will let you know once I hear anything back.
Thanks,
Helen.
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page