DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 81592--------------------------------------------------
NPC - DCB Legal - Claim form - Civil National Business Centre
DIR By: bimmerfan
Date: July 18, 2025, 10:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I have received this claim form from DCB Legal in the Civil
national business centre, the charge originally for parking at
Landmark Pinnacle. The first letter i received was from DCBL
asking for £170, I never received the initial parking charge
letter from NPC.
So in April i emailed NPC explaining that I never received
initial letter, and this was their reply:
“Your PCN is now with a company called DCBL who are dealing
with payment, and we are no longer able to assist with this
matter.
I have provided the original notice to keeper which states the
address it had been sent too, and the issue date.
You can contact DCBL on collections@dcbltd.com or 0203 434 0423.
Unfortunately, we will not be placing the case on hold at this
time as this charge has now been with DCBL since the 19th of
March 2025.”
So I just ignored the letters from DCBL after that date.
Now I have received the claim form, kindly requesting your
advice on how to approach now, I have attached the original
parking charge notice and the letter received. Thank you
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 81656--------------------------------------------------
Re: NPC - DCB Legal - Claim form - Civil National Business
Centre
DIR By: Dave65
Date: July 19, 2025, 4:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Did you receive a "Letter before Claim" from DCBL before the
Court claim?
#Post#: 81657--------------------------------------------------
Re: NPC - DCB Legal - Claim form - Civil National Business
Centre
DIR By: b789
Date: July 19, 2025, 4:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Is that Claim Form exactly as shown, unsigned by Sarah Ensall or
anyone else?
With an issue date of 16th July, you have until 4pm on Monday
4th August to submit your defence. If you submit an
Acknowledgement of Service (AoS) before then, you would then
have until 4pm on Monday 18th August 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 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@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 [claimant] v [your full name] Claim no.:
[claim number]."
--- Quote ---
> [center]IN THE COUNTY COURT[/center]
> [right]Claim No: [Claim Number][/right]
>
> [center]BETWEEN:
>
> [Claimant]
> 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.
>
> 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:
--- End Quote ---
Draft Order for the defence
HTML https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/tcewefk7daozuje25chkl/Strikeout-order-v2.pdf?rlkey=wxnymo8mwcma2jj8xihjm7pdx&st=nbtf0cn6&dl=0
However, if that N1SDT Claim form is not actually signed and is
as shown, do not use the above as I will need to tweak it
slightly.
#Post#: 81663--------------------------------------------------
Re: NPC - DCB Legal - Claim form - Civil National Business
Centre
DIR By: jfollows
Date: July 19, 2025, 5:20 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Dave65 link ---
>
> Did you receive a "Letter before Claim" from DCBL before the
Court claim?
>
--- End Quote ---
It would have been from DCB Legal which is sort of kind of not
the same company.
#Post#: 83796--------------------------------------------------
Re: NPC - DCB Legal - Claim form - Civil National Business
Centre
DIR By: bimmerfan
Date: August 2, 2025, 8:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for your help. I have sent my defence and draft order
combined into one pdf 8 days ago, I have been checking my MCOL,
but I'm not sure whether the defence has been logged?
Under claims made against you: it states the following claims
have been made against you and you have chosen to respond to
them online. To view the response options available to you
please click on the link in the Claim Number column. Does that
mean the defence has been logged? Or have I done something
wrong.
#Post#: 83819--------------------------------------------------
Re: NPC - DCB Legal - Claim form - Civil National Business
Centre
DIR By: b789
Date: August 2, 2025, 1:26 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
You can log into MCOL and use the following to override the
email defence and it will be logged almost immediately. It's the
same defence.
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
65 characters per line and 122 lines limit.
--- Quote ---
> 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 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.
>
> 4. The Defendant submits that courts have previously struck
out
> 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 CPR PD 7C.5.2(2), but chose not to do so.
>
> AND upon the claim being for a very modest sum such that the
> court considers it disproportionate and not in accordance with
> the overriding objective to allot to this case any further
share
> of the court's resources by ordering further particulars of
> claim and a further defence, each followed by further
referrals
> to the judge for 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 5 days after service of this order,
> failing which no such application may be made.
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 94375--------------------------------------------------
Re: NPC - DCB Legal - Claim form - Civil National Business
Centre
DIR By: bimmerfan
Date: October 16, 2025, 12:34 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I know I'm an idiot.. I forgot all about this letter and only
just remembered about it now when I was sorting through some
letters! I believe I only have left until midnight to complete
the Small Claims Directions Questionnaire?
HTML https://ibb.co/Pv9rRmbq
HTML https://ibb.co/v6cqZ4Km
Thanks for your help!!
#Post#: 94376--------------------------------------------------
Re: NPC - DCB Legal - Claim form - Civil National Business
Centre
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: October 16, 2025, 12:37 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Do it ASAFP - search "N180" on here for examples of what you
need to fill in for the sections you're unfamiliar with.
Complete the form online and send it by email.
#Post#: 94415--------------------------------------------------
Re: NPC - DCB Legal - Claim form - Civil National Business
Centre
DIR By: b789
Date: October 16, 2025, 4:28 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Having received your own N180 (make sure it is not simply a copy
of the claimants N180), do not use the paper form. Ignore all
the other forms that came with it. 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[member=6517]justice[/member].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.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1