DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 99861--------------------------------------------------
BPM / DCB Court Letter - Bow St Bolton - 2021
By: jambonjamon Date: November 26, 2025, 5:31 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Never fought a claim before so feeling a little out of my depth.
Read as much as I can online.
THis was in a car park where my kid did his swimming lessons -
its from 2021 so memories are hazy at best from that period when
he was 8 months old. No idea about signage etc and if its
changed in the 4 years.
Paperwork (apologies for the links - couldnt post as an image)
HTML https://ibb.co/q3L3BdvK
HTML https://ibb.co/q3L3BdvK
HTML https://ibb.co/whRvDvNh
HTML https://ibb.co/whRvDvNh
HTML https://ibb.co/cKy8pWV8
HTML https://ibb.co/cKy8pWV8
HTML https://ibb.co/8gNhXYsX
HTML https://ibb.co/8gNhXYsX
My next steps are to open an MCOL account.
Im in the process of moving house and the worry is that this
will impact on credit scores etc.
Any help greatly appreciated.
#Post#: 99862--------------------------------------------------
Re: BPM / DCB Court Letter - Bow St Bolton - 2021
By: jfollows Date: November 26, 2025, 5:45 am
---------------------------------------------------------
There is nothing in the advice which will be given here that
will lead to an impact on credit etc. The parking companies try
to frighten you into paying up by bandying around terms like
“CCJ” but if you do your research you will find the reality, for
example search this forum.
#Post#: 99870--------------------------------------------------
Re: BPM / DCB Court Letter - Bow St Bolton - 2021
By: jambonjamon Date: November 26, 2025, 6:00 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I was very sure of myself when it was just threatening letters
but this court doc just came at the wrong time for the mortgage
etc.
OK - so Ive made an account. I just need to start the AOS
process and then get my defence letter adjusted?
#Post#: 99929--------------------------------------------------
Re: BPM / DCB Court Letter - Bow St Bolton - 2021
By: b789 Date: November 26, 2025, 9:31 am
---------------------------------------------------------
With an issue date of 18th November, you have until 4pm on
Monday 8th December to submit your defence. If you submit an
Acknowledgement of Service (AoS) before then, you would then
have until 4pm on Monday 22nd December 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 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]
This will never reach a hearing and will either be struck out or
discontinued. As for your mortgage application, just read the
following and relax:
These unregulated private parking firms and their pet debt
collectors thrive on one thing: the public’s ignorance of how
County Court claims and CCJs actually work. They know that if
they can make you believe that “a claim” or a “debt recovery”
letter somehow wrecks your credit rating, you will panic and pay
them. The gullible tree is full of low-hanging fruit, and they
make a very good living shaking it.
Here is the reality, which you should read and take a “life
lesson” from...
A Parking Charge Notice (PCN) from a private firm is not a fine.
It is just a speculative invoice for an alleged breach of
contract by the driver. At that stage, nothing touches your
credit file.
If you are not successful in appealing the PCN – and appeals are
almost never successful at the initial stage and rarely at the
secondary, supposedly “independent” (but not) appeal – most
low-hanging fruit do not understand that those decisions are not
binding on them and they should never just pay. Many do,
however, because they are ignorant of the process and fearful of
imaginary consequences.
If you then get “debt recovery” letters from so-called debt
collectors, those are just more speculative invoices dressed up
in scary language designed to prey on your ignorance and fear.
Debt collectors have no legal powers whatsoever to come to your
door, take goods, or report anything to credit reference
agencies. You could receive fifty of those letters and your
credit rating would be unchanged.
As part of the modus operandi of these unregulated firms, the
next formal step is usually a Letter of Claim (LoC). That is
just a threat that they may start a County Court claim. Even
then, your credit record is still untouched. It is simply a
threat of legal action, not the result of it. Just more attempts
to intimidate the low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree into
paying out of ignorance and fear.
Only if they go ahead and issue a County Court claim do you
enter the court (judicial) process. A Claim Form comes from the
court, not from a useless and powerless debt collector. Getting
a claim issued against you does not, by itself, affect your
credit rating. A claim is simply an allegation that you owe
money. You have the right to defend it. As long as you read your
post, acknowledge the claim in time, and either defend it or
settle it, your credit file remains untouched.
A County Court Judgment (CCJ) only arises if the court actually
makes a judgment against you. That happens either because you
defended and were unsuccessful at a hearing, or because you
ignored the claim and the parking firm got judgment in default.
Even then, you still have a crucial safety net that the
low-hanging fruit do not realise exists. If you pay the full
judgment sum within 30 days of the date of judgment, the CCJ is
not registered on your credit file. It is expunged completely
from the record. It is as if it never happened as far as lenders
are concerned.
A CCJ only appears on your credit record if you fail to pay
within that 30-day window. That is the point at which it gets
recorded and can affect your ability to obtain credit. Up to
that point, no amount of tickets, no stack of debt recovery
letters, no Letter of/Before Claim, and not even the issuing of
a County Court claim has any impact on your credit history.
Bailiffs are a separate step again. They cannot simply be sent
because you have ignored an unregulated private parking invoice
or a useless debt recovery letter. Bailiffs (enforcement agents)
only become relevant after there is a CCJ and it has not been
paid.
For most smaller PCN CCJs, it is not even worth the creditor’s
time and cost to instruct bailiffs, especially when the amount
is under £600 and stuck in the slower County Court enforcement
system. But the key point is this: no unpaid CCJ, no lawful
bailiff.
So when people say things like “I had a debt recovery letter so
I might not get a mortgage now” or “if I defend, I will get a
CCJ,” they are simply wrong. It is precisely that ignorance and
fear that these firms trade on. They rely on ordinary motorists
incorrectly assuming that a red-letter demand automatically
means ruined credit and bailiffs at the door.
There is nothing in the advice given here that will affect your
credit record. On the contrary, proper advice is what keeps you
away from CCJs. If you engage with the process, defend where
appropriate, and, in the extremely rare instance where you are
unsuccessful defending a claim, pay any judgment within 30 days,
your credit file will remain completely unaffected and no
bailiff will lawfully darken your doorstep over a private
parking charge.
These companies rely on being able to intimidate the low-hanging
fruit on the gullible tree into paying out of ignorance and
fear.
#Post#: 102790--------------------------------------------------
Re: BPM / DCB Court Letter - Bow St Bolton - 2021
By: jambonjamon Date: December 17, 2025, 2:54 am
---------------------------------------------------------
This is supremely helpful. Thanks so much for the help and the
defence to submit.
I've just input on MCOL and will keep you in the loop on what
happens next.
From look at other people's cases i can expect to have a
mediation call which i refuse to make an offer on, is that
right?
#Post#: 102803--------------------------------------------------
Re: BPM / DCB Court Letter - Bow St Bolton - 2021
By: b789 Date: December 17, 2025, 4:26 am
---------------------------------------------------------
For the mediation call, the only requirement is for you "attend"
the call. It is not part of the judicial process and no judge is
involved.
This is what I advise you to say when you receive the call from
the mediator:
“Before I set out my position, please confirm from the
claimant’s side:[/I]
[indent][I]• the full name of the person attending for them;
• their role/position at their legal representative’s firm; and
• whether they hold written authority to negotiate and settle
today.[/indent]
Please relay that back to me before we continue.”
After the mediator calls back...
If identified and authority confirmed:
[indent]“Thank you. I’m content to proceed on that basis. My
settlement offer is £0, or I invite the claimant to discontinue
with no order as to costs.”[/indent]
If no/unclear authority:
[indent]“Please record that the claimant’s attendee has not
confirmed settlement authority. My position remains that
liability is denied and my offer is £0, subject to prompt
approval by an authorised solicitor if they choose to
discontinue.”[/indent]
If the mediator probes your defence:
[indent]”[I]In what capacity are you asking that question? Are
you legally trained? If not, please refrain from offering
opinions. I will be reporting any attempt to do so as
inappropriate[/I].”[/indent]
All you need to know is the name and the position of the person
acting for the claimant and report that back to us. It will be
over within minutes. Complete waste of time otherwise.
#Post#: 106613--------------------------------------------------
Re: BPM / DCB Court Letter - Bow St Bolton - 2021
By: jambonjamon Date: January 20, 2026, 1:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Just looking for a bit of information about timescales. I
entered my defence on the 17th of December. I think in my head I
assumed there would have to be a response in 28 days.
Apologies if this is explained in another thread but how long do
they have to reply?
#Post#: 108555--------------------------------------------------
Re: BPM / DCB Court Letter - Bow St Bolton - 2021
By: jambonjamon Date: February 3, 2026, 10:50 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Just had the notice of proposed allocation to small claims
track.
I have N180 forms to complete.
NOt sure of how to answer these questions - anyone walk me
through it?
D1? do i want a hearing?
Thanks
#Post#: 108581--------------------------------------------------
Re: BPM / DCB Court Letter - Bow St Bolton - 2021
By: jfollows Date: February 3, 2026, 1:21 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Search the forum for N180
[quote]Correct. 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:
• 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 (email of solicitor) and CC in yourself. Make sure that the
claim number is in the subject field of the email.[/quote]
The whole point is to ensure a hearing in person because it
makes it very likely that the claimant will discontinue as a
result.
*****************************************************