DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 81845--------------------------------------------------
how to deal with Claim Form 2 // from CEL - July 04
DIR By: Looking4Justice
Date: July 20, 2025, 6:04 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
AS per your instructions, I separated the claims, this is the
one from Civil Enforcement Limited.
looking forwrad your guidance to proceed with the defence.
Thanks in advanced for your kind help.
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 81929--------------------------------------------------
Re: how to deal with Claim Form 2 // from CEL - July 04
DIR By: b789
Date: July 21, 2025, 8:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
With an issue date of 4th July, you have until 4pm on Wednesday
23rd July to submit your defence. If you submit an
Acknowledgement of Service (AoS) before then, you would then
have until 4pm on Wednesday 6th 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
Normally we wouldn't advise using MCOL to submit the defence but
due to recent systemic failures at the CNBC, it has been adapted
so that it can be copied and pasted into the MCOL webform and
should keep most of the formatting. So, go into MCOL and submit
the following as your defence. Simply copy and paste as is here:
--- 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. In
> comparable cases, judges have found that requiring further
case
> management steps in claims of modest value would be
> disproportionate and contrary to the overriding objective.
> Accordingly, strike-out was deemed appropriate.
>
> 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 due to the Claimant’s failure to
> adequately comply with CPR 16.4. In those cases, 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. 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#: 82030--------------------------------------------------
Re: how to deal with Claim Form 2 // from CEL - July 04
DIR By: Looking4Justice
Date: July 21, 2025, 4:55 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks a lot for your kind help, I had been trying to do it on
the web page, but it's not recognising either the claim number
or password, showing on the claim received by post. It could
happend? could i call somewhere to confirm and get advise? what
should I do?
Thanks,
After keep trying on several times on the web page I got this
mesaage :
*************************************************************************************************************
Money Claim Online Service outage
We are undertaking essential work on the MCOL site and service,
therefore you cannot access your case at this time.
Where you are a defendant and today is the last day to file a
response, you can either
Fax the paper version you were served with to us on Tel No 0845
601 5889; or,
Email a copy to us by downloading the appropriate form for:
An Acknowledgment of Service
A defence or part admission
then sending this to us at mcol@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk
We apologise for any inconvenience caused and would like to
assure you that we are working to restore the service as quickly
as possible.
*********************************************************************************************************
Can I send the Defence by email to their email address
(mcol@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk) ?
#Post#: 82105--------------------------------------------------
Re: how to deal with Claim Form 2 // from CEL - July 04
DIR By: b789
Date: July 22, 2025, 8:00 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Did you submit an AOs? If yes, then you have until 6th August to
submit the defence. If you are going to email it to them, then
you may as well just send it as we normally suggest to the CNBC
at claimresponses.cnbc@justice.gov.uk.
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 Civil Enforcement Ltd v [your full name]
Claim no.: [claim number]."
--- Quote ---
> [center]IN THE COUNTY COURT[/center]
> [right]Claim No: [Claim Number][/right]
>
> [center]BETWEEN:
>
> Civil Enforcement 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.
>
> 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
#Post#: 82109--------------------------------------------------
Re: how to deal with Claim Form 2 // from CEL - July 04
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: July 22, 2025, 8:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Worth checking if MCOL is back up and running before you do, I'd
say.
If you do have to email it, I would be minded to also CC in the
email address suggested on the MCOL website, for a belt and
braces approach.
#Post#: 82159--------------------------------------------------
Re: how to deal with Claim Form 2 // from CEL - July 04
DIR By: Looking4Justice
Date: July 22, 2025, 10:43 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for your guidance and support, as the MCOL web page still
do not recognized my claim number nor password, I sent the email
to both addresses.
What is the next step ? I guess just wait for an answer by email
or post?
Should I expect DCB Legal to get in contact ?
#Post#: 82174--------------------------------------------------
Re: how to deal with Claim Form 2 // from CEL - July 04
DIR By: b789
Date: July 22, 2025, 12:34 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
You should receive a letter from HMCTS acknowledging receipt of
your defence and that it has been sent to the claimant. You will
also receive a letter from the claimant acknowledging receipt of
your defence and that their client intends to proceed.
#Post#: 91889--------------------------------------------------
Re: how to deal with Claim Form 2 // from CEL - July 04
DIR By: Looking4Justice
Date: September 28, 2025, 6:53 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for all the help, indeed I received a letter from HM
Courts & Tribunal Services with the "Acknowledge receipt of my
defense" and I also received an email on 17/09/25 (that I just
found ) from Civil Enforcement with and attachement of the N180
saying this:
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.
What should I do now ? Coudl you please advise how to proceed ?
Thanks,
#Post#: 91930--------------------------------------------------
Re: how to deal with Claim Form 2 // from CEL - July 04
DIR By: b789
Date: September 29, 2025, 5:08 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You MUST be very specific and clear when you make statements
such as:
--- Quote from: Looking4Justice link ---
>
> ...I also received an email on 17/09/25 (that I just found )
from Civil Enforcement with and attachement [sic] of the N180
saying this:...
>
--- End Quote ---
Are you 100% sure that the email you are referring to above is
from Civil Enforcement? Or is it from DCB Legal, on behalf of
their client, CEL?
A response to your defence is normal and expected. However,
please answer the following questions:
1. Has that letter been signed by an individual showing their
full name (no initials) and their position within the company?
2. Has the copy of their N180 Directions Questionnaire (DQ) been
signed by someone with their full name (no initials) and state
their capacity?
Please show us both the letter from DCB Legal and the last page
of their clients DQ with the signature block. No need to redact
anything except your own personal details.
There reason I ask is because I believe that DCB Legal are using
unauthorised persons to conduct litigation which is a criminal
offence under the Legal Services Act 2007 and, depending on your
answers to the above questions and showing us the evidence of
the signatures, will require a response which we will provide.
If you want to understand the reason why, have a read of this
thread:
Why the recent High Court appellate case of Mazur is very
relevant to all cases we deal with here
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/why-the-recent-high-court-appellate-case-of-mazur-is-very-relevant-to-all-cases-/
#Post#: 92113--------------------------------------------------
Re: how to deal with Claim Form 2 // from CEL - July 04
DIR By: Looking4Justice
Date: September 29, 2025, 6:35 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Good evening,
Thanks for your prompt response,to answer your questions:
1. Has that letter been signed by an individual showing their
full name (no initials) and their position within the company?
NO
2. Has the copy of their N180 Directions Questionnaire (DQ) been
signed by someone with their full name (no initials) and state
their capacity? NO
No, as far as I can read, there is no signature nor full name of
anyone as responsible for either the letter sent by email or the
N180 Form. They only signed the N180 Form as DCB Legal.
The email address came from a diferen email adress, apparently
from DCB legal, but it's not the same used on the N180 Form.
I am really sorry but I do not know how to attached copy of both
documents here, cant' find the attachement option I am afraid.
Looking forward to hearing from you,
Thanks again for your help,
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 5
DIR Next Page