DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 85055--------------------------------------------------
URGENT PLS:Letter from HM Courts and Tribunal Service (Claimant
Capital Car Park Control Ltd)
DIR By: dioxide
Date: August 10, 2025, 8:31 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Dear Heros,
I received a PCN through Post from Capital Car Park Control on
05 Sept 2024. (Reason: Failed to make payment for visitor
parking to cover the full duration of your visit) I made
representations as notice to keeper which was rejected. I
contacted POPLA for intervention but as we all know they turned
it down as well. I start getting letters from DCBL (Direct
Collection Bailiffs Ltd) on behalf of their client Capital Car
Park Control Limited which I ignored.
Further to it, Now I got the letter for HM Courts & Tribunal
Service saying we are contacting you because someone claims you
owe them money, and a money claim has been made against you.
I am already suffering through my health and this is giving me
sleepless nights. The total amount has been accumulated to
£267.48, a complete rip off.
Could you please suggest what should be my next step please as I
have never been in such situation before. I have attached all
the relevant paperwork, should you need anything else please
give us a shout.
Thanks in advance and best wishes for my heros here at the
forum.
#Post#: 85071--------------------------------------------------
Re: URGENT PLS:Letter from HM Courts and Tribunal Service
(Claimant Capital Car Park Control Ltd)
DIR By: b789
Date: August 11, 2025, 3:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Please stop worrying about this. If you follow this advice, you
will not be paying a penny to CCPC.
With an issue date of 7th August you have until 4pm on Tuesday
126th August to submit your defence. If you submit an
Acknowledgement of Service (AoS) before then, you would then
have until 4pm on Tuesday 9th September 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 this into the defence text box
on MCOL.
--- 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 Claimants 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 reviewing the
Particulars of Claim and the defence.
>
> UPON The Court noting that CPR 16.4 imposes a mandatory
requirement that a Particulars of Claim must include a concise
statement of the facts on which the Claimant relies
>
> UPON the Court being of the view that the Particulars of Claim
in this case are defective under CPR 16.4 because they
>
> 1. Describe the alleged breach as "Failure to purchase the
parking tariff for the registration mark of the vehicle on site
and/or within the time allowed," which means that the Defendant
does not know whether the case they have to meet is (a) they
didn't pay for parking at all; or (b) they paid for only part
of, but not all, the time they were on site (in which case entry
and departure times ought to be specified if available through
ANPR records); or (c) they made a payment but did not enter the
correct registration; or (d) they paid for parking but did not
make payment within the time limit required (in which case the
question arises as to how late they were in paying and what loss
if any was sustained)
>
> UPON the Court being mindful of the need to conduct bulk
litigation at proportionate cost, but being of the view that
this does not override the need for a Defendant to know from the
outset the factual case they have to answer.
>
> UPON the Court being satisfied it is proportionate to make the
Order set out below
>
> ORDER
>
> 1. Pursuant to CPR 3.4 the Claim is struck out
> 2. As this Order was made without a hearing any party may
apply to set aside vary or discharge it within 7 days of being
served with it.
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 85772--------------------------------------------------
Re: URGENT PLS:Letter from HM Courts and Tribunal Service
(Claimant Capital Car Park Control Ltd)
DIR By: dioxide
Date: August 15, 2025, 8:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for your prompt reply [member=26]b789[/member]. I have
got my self familiar with how to submit AOS with the help of
your given link. I will be submitting that over the weekend. I
will be mindful of copy and paste the given text provided by
you into the defence text box on MCOL. I will be updating the
further correspondence on the forum as it proceeds so that it be
beneficial for others too.
I couldn't have thanked you enough as this was giving me
unnecessary stress. Best wishes for you and family gov'nor
[member=26]b789[/member]
Kind Regards
#Post#: 90834--------------------------------------------------
Re: URGENT PLS:Letter from HM Courts and Tribunal Service
(Claimant Capital Car Park Control Ltd)
DIR By: dioxide
Date: September 21, 2025, 9:19 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Dear [member=26]b789[/member],
Hope this finds you well.
Having submitted the defence online through MCOL. I have now
received an email from DCB Legal on 17 sept 2025, along with
attached HM Courts and Tribunals N180 Directions questionnaire
(Small Claims Track).
HTML https://i.imgur.com/HlFC9i1.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/TM4C5tX.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/1zJWoUh.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/UmCujxb.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/v3g8RNx.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/gC3JLcx.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/aUi5VSJ.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/E3SS553.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/gqmxnBD.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/9QbBpMr.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/7qwM0fS.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/RKTY5q7.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/yAByfR6.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/5JbwfcH.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/eBBRbAZ.png
Please direct what should be the next step? Much appreciations
four your valuable advice and feedbacks
Blessings & Regards
#Post#: 90835--------------------------------------------------
Re: URGENT PLS:Letter from HM Courts and Tribunal Service
(Claimant Capital Car Park Control Ltd)
DIR By: jfollows
Date: September 21, 2025, 9:27 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You will be asked to submit your own N180 DQ:
--- Quote ---
> Having received your own 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:
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
--- End Quote ---
Your preferences override those stated by DCB Legal and are
important to ensure that the action will be discontinued in due
course, before they need to pay the court fee.
After this, you will attend a telephone mediation session in
which you offer £0 to settle, and that will end the session. The
case will be allocated to your local court and, importantly, you
will be told the deadline by which the fee has to be paid, so
expect discontinuation on or shortly before this.
#Post#: 90837--------------------------------------------------
Re: URGENT PLS:Letter from HM Courts and Tribunal Service
(Claimant Capital Car Park Control Ltd)
DIR By: b789
Date: September 21, 2025, 9:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Have you redacted the name of the person who signed that N180 DQ
from for DCB legal? If so why? There is NO reason whatsoever to
redact the names of signatories of any documentation that is
involved in litigation. If the signatory is not authorised, they
are committing a criminal offence and will affect the costs you
can claim when they discontinue.
#Post#: 90841--------------------------------------------------
Re: URGENT PLS:Letter from HM Courts and Tribunal Service
(Claimant Capital Car Park Control Ltd)
DIR By: dioxide
Date: September 21, 2025, 10:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks very much for your prompt advice and guidance
[member=636]jfollows[/member] and [member=26]b789[/member].
[member=636]jfollows[/member] I will now go on to fill and
submit my own N180 DQ as per your suggestion using the provided
link and mindful of your advice when choosing options whilst
filling it out.
[member=26]b789[/member], No, I haven't redacted the name of the
person who signed that N180 DQ from DCB Legal on purpose.
Should I have posted that email or attachment in any other way
or differently, please do advise me and I shall follow.
Many thanks to you guys again for guiding me through this.
Best wishes
#Post#: 90859--------------------------------------------------
Re: URGENT PLS:Letter from HM Courts and Tribunal Service
(Claimant Capital Car Park Control Ltd)
DIR By: b789
Date: September 21, 2025, 2:41 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
In which case, you should send the following email to
info@dcblegal.co.uk and CC yourself:
--- Quote ---
> Subject: Claim [Claim No.] Signatory identification and
authorisation (N180; PoC SoT)
>
> Dear Mr Croot (COLP),
>
> Re: [Claimant] v [Defendant] Claim No. [____] (issued
[date])
>
> This is sent on an open basis.
>
> I note the N180 (Directions Questionnaire) filed in this
matter is signed only DCB Legal Ltd without identifying any
individual. For costs and compliance purposes, please confirm
the following within 7 days:
>
> A) N180 (Directions Questionnaire)
> [indent] The full name of the individual who signed/confirmed
the N180 filed by DCB Legal.
> Their capacity (employee/consultant/seconded) and job title
at the time of signature.
> Whether that individual is personally authorised to conduct
litigation and, if so, the basis (practising solicitor with SRA
number / CILEX practitioner with litigation rights / other).
> If not personally authorised, the name and SRA number of the
supervising authorised lawyer who authorised that filing, and
the basis on which the signature was permitted.[/indent]
>
> B) Particulars of Claim Statement of Truth (SoT) signed by
Ms Sarah Ensall
> [indent] Whether Ms Sarah Ensall is personally authorised to
conduct litigation.
> If authorised, the basis (e.g. practising certificate/CILEX
rights) and the relevant registration number(s).
> If not personally authorised, the basis on which she signed
the SoT and the identity (name and SRA number) of the
supervising authorised lawyer responsible for that
pleading.[/indent]
>
> For clarity, reasonable public checks have not identified Ms
Ensall on the SRA Solicitors Register (or as otherwise
authorised). If this is mistaken, please provide her
registration details.
>
> These issues go to compliance with the Legal Services Act 2007
(reserved legal activities) and will be raised on costs. If it
appears that any reserved steps have been taken by an
unauthorised person, I will rely on High Court guidance and will
not hesitate to place the matter before the Court and, if
appropriate, report the individual(s) and DCB Legal to the SRA.
>
> Please respond within 7 days.
>
> Yours faithfully,
>
> [Full name]
>
> Defendant
> [Postal address]
--- End Quote ---
Please show us the response when you receive it.
#Post#: 90876--------------------------------------------------
Re: URGENT PLS:Letter from HM Courts and Tribunal Service
(Claimant Capital Car Park Control Ltd)
DIR By: dioxide
Date: September 21, 2025, 5:05 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks [member=26]b789[/member], I will be now sending this
email off to DCB Legal as per instructions.
Dear [member=636]jfollows[/member], as per your suggestions to
fill out the N180 DQ form. I have almost completed the form,
being mindful of the instructions but I got stuck at Section E
'About the mediation appointment'. Whose details should I have
to give in this section? If you can guide me on this please.
Much appreciated folks
Regards
#Post#: 90877--------------------------------------------------
Re: URGENT PLS:Letter from HM Courts and Tribunal Service
(Claimant Capital Car Park Control Ltd)
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: September 21, 2025, 5:31 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
If you are the defendant, your details.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page