Free Traffic Legal Advice

Live cases legal advice => Private parking tickets => Topic started by: charliem040 on October 01, 2024, 02:14:48 pm

Title: Re: Private car park PCN - no permit - debt collectors letter
Post by: charliem040 on November 18, 2025, 11:36:00 am
I suppose I was thinking if there was anything relevant in the defence they would have just stayed silent but I take your point!

Ok thanks for the much-needed moral support 😄💪
Title: Re: Private car park PCN - no permit - debt collectors letter
Post by: DWMB2 on November 18, 2025, 11:33:21 am
Quote
I am concerned however that as they have stated nothing relevant in my defence they will press on to court, is that likely?
At risk of sounding blunt, they're unlikely to turn up to mediation and say that they agree with your defence...

Mediation is pointless in these cases, you attend merely because you must. Keep plugging on.
Title: Re: Private car park PCN - no permit - debt collectors letter
Post by: charliem040 on November 18, 2025, 11:23:07 am
Good morning,

I have now had my mediation phone call following the procedure set out in advice in other threads.

The mediator first summarised the claim and said that the claimant states there is nothing relevant in my defence. I didn’t comment on that but asked the mediator to confirm the name and role of the claimant’s representative and whether they have full authority to settle. She rang me back and said the representative was unwilling to give their name or position but could confirm they have authority to settle.

I said without their name and position I was unable to confirm they had authority to settle and was not prepared to take their word for it. I asked them to record that the claimants had not confirmed settlement authority and that my liability is denied and my offer is £0. The mediator said she cannot physically record anything like that and the only thing on record will be that a settlement was not agreed. That’s all the courts will see. Not sure if that’s correct.

I am concerned however that as they have stated nothing relevant in my defence they will press on to court, is that likely? There is a 10 minutes grace period in this area apparently and I was only parked for 16mins (without realising it had become a permitted area when it hadn’t been for years and years) so I am holding onto the hope the charges are seen as unreasonable for the short time period but not sure if that’s relevant or if I even need to worry about it.

Huge thanks as ever for your time and advice!


Title: Re: Private car park PCN - no permit - debt collectors letter
Post by: b789 on September 26, 2025, 03:51:47 pm
Quote from: charliem040 on September 26, 2025, 03:35:42 pm
Hi there, they have now sent me an N180 form… does this mean they are proceeding with the case and I will have to attend a mediation and then potentially court? Thank you

Of course the case is "proceeding". You are in the process. However, that does not mean you will have to attend court! You will have to "attend" a useless mediation phone call, which is not part of the judicial process and no judge is involved.

The only thing for sure is that the claim will eventually be struck out or discontinued. You could try nd search the forum for any go there hundreds of similar cases to see what happened and when.

For now, her is the advice on the N180 Directions Questionnaire (DQ). Once you receive your mediation appointment, come back and I will provide the advice on how to handle that.

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.

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: 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@justice.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.
Title: Re: Private car park PCN - no permit - debt collectors letter
Post by: charliem040 on September 26, 2025, 03:35:42 pm
Hi there, they have now sent me an N180 form… does this mean they are proceeding with the case and I will have to attend a mediation and then potentially court? Thank you
Title: Re: Private car park PCN - no permit - debt collectors letter
Post by: charliem040 on September 07, 2025, 07:22:03 pm
Thank you so much for your help, it is greatly appreciated. I have submitted that defence on MCOL.
Title: Re: Private car park PCN - no permit - debt collectors letter
Post by: b789 on September 07, 2025, 03:05:33 am
With an issue date of 18th August you have until 4pm on Monday 8th September to submit your defence. If you submit an Acknowledgement of Service (AoS) before then, you would then have until 4pm on Monday 22nd 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:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/xvqu3bask5m0zir/money-claim-online-How-to-Acknowledge.pdf?dl=0

MCOL CPR16.4 only defence

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
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 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 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.
Title: Re: Private car park PCN - no permit - debt collectors letter
Post by: charliem040 on September 06, 2025, 10:20:04 pm
Ah issue date is 18th August, so I have until Monday to respond.
Title: Re: Private car park PCN - no permit - debt collectors letter
Post by: b789 on September 06, 2025, 10:12:46 pm
What is the issue date of the claim? You have 5 days from that date to start counting. If the 19th day from the issue date is on a non working day, then you have until 4pm on the next working day.
Title: Re: Private car park PCN - no permit - debt collectors letter
Post by: charliem040 on September 06, 2025, 08:11:32 pm
Hi there, I thought they had given up but while I was on holiday I received a claim form from HM Courts and tribunals. Unfortunately I have missed their 14 deadline and don’t know how to respond now. Would you be able to help me with what I’m best doing? Thank you so much
Title: Re: Private car park PCN - no permit - debt collectors letter
Post by: charliem040 on October 01, 2024, 04:23:21 pm
Thank you so much for the advice, I really appreciate it! The cat litter tray will be in fine fettle.
Title: Re: Private car park PCN - no permit - debt collectors letter
Post by: b789 on October 01, 2024, 03:53:37 pm
As you are past any appeal stage, you must ignore all debt collector letters. DCBL and any other debt collector have no powers to do anything. They cannot take you to court or send bailiffs around. It simply does not work like that.

DCBL et al operate on a no-win, no-fee basis and rely on you being low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree and will capitulate and pay up out of ignorance of your rights and the law. Never, ever, ever, ever, eve, ever, communicate with a debt collector. They are powerless and are not a party to any alleged contract breach by the driver. I cannot emphasise enough, never, ever communicate with them and you can safely ignore them.

If you follow the advice, you will not be paying a penny to CEL. For the time being, ignore everything until you receive a Letter of Claim (LoC) issued by one of the bottom-dwelling bulk litigators, most likely DCB Legal.

Besides the fact that it will say "Letter of Claim" on it, you can tell it is real because it will give you 30 days, not 14 to pay before a claim is issued in the county court. Do not go into panic mode because litigation is threatened and imminent. This is a good thing.

Not that it will ever get as far as a hearing in court, but the county court small claims track is the ultimate dispute resolution service. Only a judge can decide whether you owe CEL a debt to not.

But, as I mentioned, this is 99.9% unlikely to ever get as far as a hearing. Any claim that is defended using the provided defence template, will end up being discontinued before there claimant has to pay the hearing fee. This is not supposition. It is a fact.

So, for now, sit back and use the debt collector letters as lining for the bottom of a cat litter tray or some other suitable and appropriate use. When (possibly "if") you receive an LoC, come back and we will provide the advice on how to respond and then, once the N1SDT Claim form arrives from the CNBC, we will provide the advice on how to acknowledge service and the defence for it.
Title: Re: Private car park PCN - no permit - debt collectors letter
Post by: dave-o on October 01, 2024, 02:46:56 pm
Other more experienced people will advise on the specific actions from here, but you can relax - the DCB Legal part of this story means nothing at all, and can be ignored.  This is from someone who has recently sent DCB packing.
Title: Private car park PCN - no permit - debt collectors letter
Post by: charliem040 on October 01, 2024, 02:14:48 pm
Hi everyone,
I am the registered keeper of a vehicle that was parked in a privately owned car park in Ilkeston town centre where permits are required. Historically it has been a small free for all/no man’s land area, hence the genuine mistake the driver having not been to the area for some time and the signs weren’t noticed as they were in a rush. The vehicle was parked there for just over 16 minutes while keys were collected from an estate agent on the pedestrianised high street. I received the first registered keeper letter from civil enforcement (link to photo should be below), then 2nd letter, now I’m on the debt collection letter from DCBL and the 14th day is today. So I guess they may try and take me to court now. I can’t afford to pay the amount they are asking for £170 and scared about additional court fees they mention so I have been ignoring the letters and hoping it would go away!

I did a bit of googling and can’t see any obvious flaws in the letter or notices to my untrained eyes. My only thought is might I be successful at appealing to popla or at the court hearing on grounds of disproportionate charges given it was only 16minutes? I read that’s got harder to argue now though.

My other thought was could i go in and talk to the carpark owner (office is close to car park) to see if they will call off the hounds if I offer to give them a tenner or something for the time the car was parked there and promise it will never be parked there again?! Probably a long shot. Not sure if they could even do that now in the hands of DCBL.

Many thanks in advance for any suggestions you may have, I’d be very grateful.
S

https://ibb.co/tqgQb6R
https://ibb.co/Bf4dRpX
https://ibb.co/JKHG9vV
https://ibb.co/6v1mhLC
https://ibb.co/VTXrx0Q
https://ibb.co/vvPCd7F
https://ibb.co/dJFf37X
https://ibb.co/FY9QjN5
https://ibb.co/Y7zxWXh