DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 103061--------------------------------------------------
Filling in a N1SDT form.
By: MrBenn76 Date: December 18, 2025, 12:45 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Could someone please advise me how to fill in a N1SDT form to
avoid paying court and bailiff fees please. It regards a
parking charge from CPPlus a few months ago, however we never
received the original fine, I'm guessing due to the fact the V5C
was registered at our old address at the time. The first we
heard of it was a letter from DCBL demanding £170 for non
payment fees and now we have received the N1SDT, which I
understand is the important one. We don't mind paying the
original fine, however much that is, but object to paying £263
to avoid a CCJ. We had another fine a few months ago along
similar lines and didn't deal with it in time, costing us £284.
In fact, on another note, that first fine was paid in full
within the specified time, however a CCJ is still showing on my
credit report. The letter said it would be automatically
removed upon payment, but not as of yet. Do I need to apply
somewhere to have it removed?
Thankyou for your attention.
#Post#: 103088--------------------------------------------------
Re: Filling in a N1SDT form.
By: RichardW Date: December 18, 2025, 3:33 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Post the claim form, redact name, address, claim no and MCOL
password. Yes, it is important to deal with it or you will end
up with another default judgement - most likely the claim is
defective, and if you defend it will be discontinued - post the
details and a defence will be forthcoming.
#Post#: 103108--------------------------------------------------
Re: Filling in a N1SDT form.
By: b789 Date: December 18, 2025, 4:58 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
As above, all you need to do is show us the N1SDT page which has
the Particulars of Claim (PoC) on it. DO NOT redact the date of
the issue of the claim.
You DO NOT fill out any of the forms that came with it. I can
guarantee you with greater than 99.9% certainty that if you
follow my advice, show us what is asked and then submit the
defence we provide, you will not be paying a penny to anyone.
There is absolutely NO danger of a CCJ, even if you were as rare
as a hens tooth and this went all the way to a hearing and you
were unsuccessful. You certainly DO NOT, ever, EVER admit
liability by offering to pay it ti "avoid a CCJ". There is ZERO
chance you would EVER have a CCJ on your record, even if you
lost!!!!!
You are clearly low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree that can
be intimidated into paying out of ignorance and fear. Exactly
what these firms prey on.
Once you have provided what has been asked, the PoC and the date
of issue of the claim, I will give you the necessary information
and the defence.
In the meantime, read the following article I reduced to try and
educate the masses who have no idea how CCJs work:
[quote]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.
[/quote]
#Post#: 103170--------------------------------------------------
Re: Filling in a N1SDT form.
By: MrBenn76 Date: December 19, 2025, 5:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Sorry for the delay. I've had to relearn how to use a
computer/scanner etc.
OK, here are the images for the N1SDT form....hopefully.
HTML https://ibb.co/FbQWVK9q
HTML https://ibb.co/FbQWVK9q
HTML https://ibb.co/V01tBFJF
HTML https://ibb.co/V01tBFJF
HTML https://ibb.co/FkTsh4mV
HTML https://ibb.co/FkTsh4mV
HTML https://ibb.co/DgsF7Tj3
HTML https://ibb.co/DgsF7Tj3
HTML https://ibb.co/Zp65sYbg
HTML https://ibb.co/Zp65sYbg
HTML https://ibb.co/WWyFPgR9
HTML https://ibb.co/WWyFPgR9
By my calculation, I have until the 29th Dec to reply. So, with
Christmas inbetween, I'm hoping it will arrive on time.
Although, it does say I can respond online, which I think will
be safer.
Thanks for your help.
Ben.
#Post#: 103196--------------------------------------------------
Re: Filling in a N1SDT form.
By: b789 Date: December 19, 2025, 7:44 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you but we only needed to see the N1SDT Claim Form.
However, you have longer than you think.
With an issue date of 10th December, you have until 4pm on
Monday 29th December to submit your defence. If you submit an
Acknowledgement of Service (AoS) before then, you would then
have until 4pm on Monday 12th January 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]
#Post#: 104879--------------------------------------------------
Re: Filling in a N1SDT form.
By: MrBenn76 Date: January 7, 2026, 12:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
A progress update on my case....
I filed my reply to the claim on MCOL, copied and pasted exactly
as provided. It was easier than I expected, thankfully. A few
days later I received from the courts, a letter of
acknowledgement essentially informing me that the prerogative
now lies with the claimant to pursue, should they wish. I'm
hoping they will not and that that will be an end to the matter.
I will post again should I hear any more, hopefully with a
favourable outcome.
Many thanks for your help and expertise, it is much appreciated.
#Post#: 104880--------------------------------------------------
Re: Filling in a N1SDT form.
By: jfollows Date: January 7, 2026, 12:27 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Of course they will “pursue”, it’s what they do.
You really should just search the forum for “DCB Legal” to see
the process they will follow.
The case will be allocated to your local court, but DCB Legal
will discontinue rather than pay the court fee. They are trying
to frighten you into paying them.
#Post#: 104884--------------------------------------------------
Re: Filling in a N1SDT form.
By: jfollows Date: January 7, 2026, 1:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
On your existing recorded CCJ,
HTML https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/form-n443-application-for-a-certificate-of-satisfaction-or-cancellation
[quote]If you pay within one month
If you pay the full amount within one month, you can get the
judgment removed from the register.
Write to the court to say you’ve paid. You’ll need to send proof
of payment from the person or business you owed money
to.[/quote]
If you didn’t pay within one month, it can’t be removed but
should show as “satisfied”.
#Post#: 107363--------------------------------------------------
Re: Filling in a N1SDT form.
By: MrBenn76 Date: January 26, 2026, 5:13 am
---------------------------------------------------------
So, I received this email the other day. Obviously a last ditch
attempt to make us panic and pay up. The fact is, this is my
elderly Mother's ticket and she's panicking at the idea of going
to court. I've told her it won't come to that but she's still
considering paying. If it were me, I wouldn't think twice and
tell them where to go. I've read other cases on here where they
have finally backed down. Can we be certain that it will be
dropped before it goes any further?
From: Elliot Norman <ElliotN@dcblegal.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2026,
Subject: Our ref:
To:
Dear,
To assist the Court in achieving its overriding objective, our
Client may be prepared to settle this case. I can confirm our
Client would be agreeable to your offer of £170.00 in full and
final settlement of this Claim. The current outstanding balance
is £263.08.
Should you be agreeable to this offer, please confirm the same
within 14 days. Failure to make payment may result in the matter
progressing to the next stage.
Payment can be made via bank transfer to our designated client
account: -
Account Name: DCB Legal Ltd Client Account
Sort Code: 20-24-09
Account Number: 60964441
You must quote the correct case reference () when making
payment. If you do not, we may be unable to correctly allocate
the payment. If further action is taken by us as a result of an
incorrect reference being quoted, you will be liable for any
further fees or costs incurred.
Alternatively, you can contact DCB Legal Ltd on 0203 838 7038 to
make payment over the telephone or online at
HTML https://dcblegal.co.uk/response/pay-online/.
Upon receipt of the settlement sum of £170.00 we will update the
Court that the matter has been settled. If you are not
agreeable, we will continue to follow the Court process as
normal
Kind Regards,
Litigation Support Team
DCB Legal Ltd
#Post#: 107364--------------------------------------------------
Re: Filling in a N1SDT form.
By: DWMB2 Date: January 26, 2026, 5:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=MrBenn76 link=topic=9208.msg107363#msg107363
date=1769426017]
Can we be certain that it will be dropped before it goes any
further?
[/quote]
Without a crystal ball, none of us can offer any guarantees.
Based on previous experience, the large majority of cases with
DCB Legal involved result in the matter being discontinued.
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page