Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Private parking tickets => Topic started by: robbieuk on August 28, 2026, 08:40:32 am
-
Quick question - was the driver revealed in any appeal?
I am 99% certain that registered keeper made an appeal and said I took my daughter to blood test so that would have been identified as a driver.
-
Quick question - was the driver revealed in any appeal?
-
The courts recently have struck out this defence because it’s a boilerplate/template defence and does not address the specifics of the claim in any way. Your last sentence is much more relevant.
A defence needs to address the NtK and the Particulars of Claim on the N1SDT form.
There’s noting wrong with saying that the Particulars of Claim are rubbish, but not to make this the entirety of your defence.
But it’s your defence and your risk.
-
I’m so sorry I haven’t updated the post earlier.
The claim was acknowledged on 1st September so all is well with that part.
I have in the past, with the help of these forums, filed the following defence and eventually dcb legal withdrew their court claim. Should this be used as well?
IN THE COUNTY COURT
Claim No: [Claim Number]
BETWEEN:
UK Parking Control Ltd
Claimant
- and -
[Defendant's Full Name]
Defendant
DEFENCE
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:
(a) The contract referred to is not detailed or attached to the PoC in accordance with CPR PD 16(7.5);
(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 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:
(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.
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:
Also, should I mention anywhere in defence that defendant was using clinic and the proof does exist to prove it?
-
Agreed.
If an AoS is filed by 4pm on 7 September then the deadling for filing a defence is 4pm on 21 September.
A defence needs to address the NtK and the Particulars of Claim on the N1SDT form.
I would advise filing an AoS and hoping that the other information arrives by 21 September, and thinking about what a defence might say if it doesn’t. Failing to file a defence could be fatal.
-
Have you acknowledged service yet? If you don't do it by tomorrow (mon 7th) you automatically lose the case. Court deadlines are strict.
-
Sorry for keeping referring to it as a fine.
I am 99% certain that registered keeper made an appeal and said I took my daughter to blood test so that would have been identified as a driver.
-
It’s not a “fine”, it’s an invoice for payment under the contract that the driver entered into by reading the signs and parking.
It’s not clear whether or not you identified the driver in your correspondence. If you didn’t, then there is a good path to a defence and a discontinuation.
-
Whilst I wait for the subject access request request to be fulfilled, this is what I have found so far.
I remember appealing that I definitely was using practise as we had daughter’s bloods appointment. I even sent them clinic confirmation for the appointment that showed date and time that was around the time when vehicle was parked.
This is the reply to my appeal / information they sent me regarding my appeal - https://ibb.co/k2xKzSyc
https://ibb.co/npCrCVN
https://ibb.co/0VqnFJk9
https://ibb.co/9HfbHWGn
https://ibb.co/gLKZ0wwg
I haven’t responded anything to that. They have then sent me a fine reminder on 1st June 2023 to which I have sent another email to them on 14th June 2023 - https://ibb.co/YFr2qRjP .
Since then I think there were few letters in 2023 but they stopped in 2024/2025.
I haven’t received anything in 2026, no letter of claim has arrived either, just a straight court invitation - bizarre.
-
Yes.
If you defend this properly it’s extremely likely that DCB Legal will discontinue before having to pay the court fee, but that will be in a number of months.
The NtK is the best starting point for constructing a defence.
-
I will see if I can find the original Notice to Keeper. If not, will have to send a subject data access request I guess
-
We need to see the original Notice to Keeper and the text of your appeal at the very least to be able to advise you properly.
The only thing to note from your county court claim form is that you need to file an Acknowledgment of Service or a defence by 7 September, and if you file an AoS then you have until 21 September to file a defence.
-
Hi all,
This one really infuriates me as Parking Eye were absolute a r s e s….back in March 2023 took my daughter to a clinic for a blood test. This was not the first time we went there. On arrival input details of our car registration to a newly installed system. Few weeks later letter arrives requesting to pay fine for staying in a clinic car park without permission.
I have made an appeal, told them what happened, even sent an appointment confirmation proving that we were in the clinic and yet they decided it was not acceptable. For few months they sent couple more letters but that was the end of it.
Now out of nowhere, even with no Letter of claim, a court claim arrives from DCB Legal….claim issued on 19th August so still have time…what should I focus on my defence?
https://ibb.co/84GzjH53