DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 91420--------------------------------------------------
Re: DCBL Private parking (eurocarparks)
DIR By: b789
Date: September 25, 2025, 5:48 am
---------------------------------------------------------
All normal, but slightly irregular in that that correspondence
is "conducting litigation" by whoever authored it. However it is
signed only as DCB Legal. Considering that the PoC in the claim
were signed by Sarah Ensall, who does not appear to be
authorised to carry out regulated conduct of litigation, you
should send the following email to info@dcblegal.co.uk and CC
yourself:
--- Quote ---
> Subject: Claim [court ref] – authority to conduct litigation
and signing of statements of truth
>
> Dear Sir/Madam,
>
> I note that the claim form/particulars are signed by Sarah
Ensall, “Head of Legal”. Please confirm by return:
>
> [indent](1) whether Ms Ensall is an authorised person for the
purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007 with rights to conduct
litigation (and her SRA/CILEX number and current practising
status); or, if not,
> (2) the precise exemption relied upon under Sch. 3 LSA 2007
that permits her to sign a statement of truth and otherwise
conduct litigation in this matter.[/indent]
>
> For the avoidance of doubt, correspondence from your
“Litigation Support” mailbox is clearly conduct of litigation.
If any person conducting this litigation or signing a statement
of truth is not authorised (or exempt), please confirm the steps
you will take to remedy the irregularity, including re-service
of any document that requires a compliant personal signature by
an authorised person, and your position on costs arising.
>
> Absent confirmation, I will reserve the right to raise this
with the Court and the SRA.
>
> Yours faithfully,
>
> [full name]
--- End Quote ---
Show us any response when you receive it.
#Post#: 100625--------------------------------------------------
Re: DCBL Private parking (eurocarparks)
DIR By: mistermer
Date: December 1, 2025, 7:47 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi, it was over 2 months since and I have made sure to CC myself
but no response from them.
Is that normal to have no response for a whole 2 months?
#Post#: 100670--------------------------------------------------
Re: DCBL Private parking (eurocarparks)
DIR By: b789
Date: December 2, 2025, 7:48 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Given where the claim sits, your defence has been filed and
acknowledged and the case is simply parked at CNBC while the
claimant decides whether to proceed. This is a good moment to
get the “unauthorised person conducting litigation” issue firmly
on the record without spending any money on applications.
First, send one final, short chaser to DCB Legal by forwarding
your original email. At the top of the forwarded thread, write
something like:
--- Quote ---
> Subject: Claim [court ref] – authority to conduct litigation
(final request)
>
> Dear Sir/Madam,
>
> Further to my email dated [date], I note that no reply has
been received in over two months. Please treat this as a final
request for clarification and confirm, by return, whether Ms
Sarah Ensall is an authorised person under the Legal Services
Act 2007 with a right to conduct litigation, or, if not, the
specific statutory exemption relied upon.
>
> If no response is received within seven days, I will draw the
matter to the court’s and the SRA’s attention.
>
> Yours faithfully,
>
> [Name]
--- End Quote ---
That gives them one last clear opportunity to answer and shows
you acted reasonably before escalating.
If they still do not respond after a week, you then email the
court so the issue is on the file before allocation. Write to
CaseProgression.CNBC[member=6517]justice[/member].gov.uk,
quoting the claim number, and explain briefly that the claim
form and particulars are signed by “Sarah Ensall, Head of Legal”
at DCB Legal.
--- Quote ---
> Re: Claim [court ref]
>
> Dear Sir/Madam,
>
> I draw the court’s attention to a potential irregularity in
the conduct of this claim. The claim form and particulars are
signed by Sarah Ensall, “Head of Legal”, DCB Legal Ltd. Despite
my emails of [dates], DCB Legal has not confirmed whether Ms
Ensall is an authorised person with a right to conduct
litigation within the meaning of the Legal Services Act 2007,
nor identified any statutory exemption relied upon.
>
> I respectfully ask that this correspondence be placed on the
court file so the issue may be considered at allocation or any
later hearing.
>
> Yours faithfully,
>
> [Name]
--- End Quote ---
Attach your original email and the chaser.
For later in the process, you should prepare a short paragraph
to drop into your witness statement or any later document. In
substance, it should say:
--- Quote ---
> The Defendant notes that the claim form and particulars were
signed by Sarah Ensall, described as Head of Legal at DCB Legal
Ltd. The Defendant wrote on [dates] asking DCB Legal to confirm
whether Ms Ensall is an authorised person with rights to conduct
litigation, or to identify the exemption relied upon under
Schedule 3 of the Legal Services Act 2007. No response was
received.
>
> In Mazur & Anor v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC
2341 (KB), the High Court held that un-authorised employees
cannot conduct litigation, including signing statements of
truth, even under supervision. The continued silence from DCB
Legal leaves genuine doubt as to whether the claim was validly
signed or whether an irregularity has occurred.
--- End Quote ---
Separately, you can send a short complaint to the SRA at
report@sra.org.uk. In that complaint, you identify DCB Legal and
the claim number, explain that the claim and statements of truth
have been signed by Ms Ensall as Head of Legal, and that you
have repeatedly asked them to confirm whether she and any
“Litigation Support” staff are authorised persons under the
Legal Services Act 2007 or covered by a specific exemption, but
they have ignored you for over two months. You then say you are
concerned that DCB Legal may be permitting un-authorised
individuals to conduct litigation and sign statements of truth
contrary to the Legal Services Act and the SRA Standards,
particularly in light of the Mazur decision, and you ask the SRA
to investigate. Attach your emails as evidence.
--- Quote ---
> I am the Defendant in claim [number]. DCB Legal Ltd issued the
claim and signed statements of truth via Ms Sarah Ensall, “Head
of Legal”. I have repeatedly requested confirmation that she
(and their “Litigation Support” staff) are authorised persons
under the Legal Services Act 2007 or covered by an exemption.
After more than two months, there has been no reply.
>
> I am concerned that DCB Legal may be permitting un-authorised
individuals to conduct litigation and sign statements of truth,
contrary to the ruling in Mazur & Anor v Charles Russell
Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) and the SRA Standards.
Please investigate.
--- End Quote ---
This way, you create a clear audit trail: you asked a legitimate
question, you chased, they stayed silent, you informed the court
and regulator. If they later try to rely on their statements of
truth or claim to take compliance very seriously, you will have
a ready-made narrative that they ignored a straightforward
regulatory query from a litigant in person.
#Post#: 108934--------------------------------------------------
Re: DCBL Private parking (eurocarparks)
DIR By: mistermer
Date: February 6, 2026, 10:31 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi, so I have done all the above and still had no response from
them until 7 days ago.
On the 30th of January I got this response from them:
HTML https://ibb.co/hxfV4qLg
The link above seems not to be working so there is another link
just in case:
HTML https://freeimage.host/i/fbSoIee
#Post#: 108973--------------------------------------------------
Re: DCBL Private parking (eurocarparks)
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: February 7, 2026, 4:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
So basically they are admitting wrong doing.
It is important to note that the Mazur case confirmed the rules
that ALREADY existed and DID NOT create new rules.
There are not enough solicitors employed by the bulk litigators
to cover the workload so something will have to give.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 2
DIR Previous Page