Nothing for you to do. They can issue the claim at any time but they have not responded to your last communication back in May. There is no automatic requirement in law to issue a fresh LoC, but in practice, if they now wish to litigate, they ought to send updated, compliant pre-action correspondence first. If they don’t, that’s something you can use against them on conduct and costs.
I have never heard of this company.Nor me - it was that (and the apparent lack of mentioning the alleged creditor) that sparked my curiosity.
No. The ball is in their court. If you don't receive a response in the next 6-8 weeks, the remind us.
You should respond with a brief email such as:QuoteSubject: Re: Your Letter Before Claim – Non-Compliance
Dear Sirs,
Thank you for your reply dated 14th May 2025.
Unfortunately, your client has failed to rectify the material non-compliance of your Letter Before Claim with the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims. The 'evidence packs' do not satisfy the disclosure requirements set out in paragraphs 3.1, 5.1 and 6 of the Protocol. For example, there is still no cause of action properly pleaded, no copy of any contract with the landowner, no explanation of the legal basis for the £60 'debt recovery' sum, and no indication as to whether your client is pursuing me as the driver or the keeper.
I repeat my request that your client provide a compliant Letter Before Claim before commencing proceedings. If your client issues a claim without doing so, I reserve the right to seek a stay and invite the court to impose sanctions for failure to comply with the Protocol.
Yours faithfully,
[Name]
This keeps the pressure on them to act reasonably and gives you better footing later to request a stay or strike-out, especially under PD Pre-Action Conduct paras 13–16 and CPR 1.1/1.3 (overriding objective and parties' duty to help the court).
Subject: Re: Your Letter Before Claim – Non-Compliance
Dear Sirs,
Thank you for your reply dated 14th May 2025.
Unfortunately, your client has failed to rectify the material non-compliance of your Letter Before Claim with the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims. The 'evidence packs' do not satisfy the disclosure requirements set out in paragraphs 3.1, 5.1 and 6 of the Protocol. For example, there is still no cause of action properly pleaded, no copy of any contract with the landowner, no explanation of the legal basis for the £60 'debt recovery' sum, and no indication as to whether your client is pursuing me as the driver or the keeper.
I repeat my request that your client provide a compliant Letter Before Claim before commencing proceedings. If your client issues a claim without doing so, I reserve the right to seek a stay and invite the court to impose sanctions for failure to comply with the Protocol.
Yours faithfully,
[Name]
What date did you send the DRN and how did you send it? If by post, did you get a free proof of posting certificate from the post office? If by email, did you CC in yourself?
What "complaint" did you fail to send to EPS? Are you saying you failed to request a copy of the original NtK?
You now have a Letter of Claim (LoC) which means that you are going to receive an N1SDT Claim Form from the CNBC in the post after 30 days from. the date of the LoC.
If you doubt follow the advice and then come asking for further advice, why do you expect us to help you?
For now, you respond to the LoC with the following:QuoteDear Sirs,
Your Letter Before Claim dated 24th April 2025 contains insufficient detail of the claim and fails to provide copies of evidence your client places reliance upon and thus is in complete contravention of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims.
I am the registered keeper of the vehicle. I am not obliged to identify the driver and I decline to do so. As there is no legal presumption that the keeper of a vehicle was its driver on any particular occasion, your client cannot pursue me as driver as per VCS v Edward (20230) [H0KF6C9C].
I will defend any claim vigorously and seek costs in relation to your client’s unreasonable and vexatious conduct under Part 27.14(2)(g)
As your letter lacks specificity and breaches the requirements of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (paragraphs 3.1(a)-(d), 5.1 and 5.2) as well as the Practice Direction - Pre-Action Conduct (paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c)), you must treat this letter as a formal request for all of the documents/information that the protocol now requires your client to provide. Your client must not issue proceedings without complying with that protocol.
As solicitors you must surely be familiar with the requirements of both the Practice Direction and the Pre-Action Protocol for debt claims and your client, as a serial litigator of debt claims, should likewise be aware of them. As you (and your client) must know, the Practice Direction and Protocol bind all potential litigants, whatever the size or type of the claim. Its express purpose is to assist parties in understanding the claim and their respective positions in relation to it, to enable parties to take stock of their positions and to negotiate a settlement, or at least narrow the issues, without incurring the costs of court proceedings or using up valuable court time. It is embarrassing that a firm of Solicitors are sending a consumer a vague and un-evidenced 'Letter Before Claim' in complete ignorance of the pre-existing Practice Direction and the Pre-Action Protocol.
I confirm that, once I am in receipt of a Letter Before Claim that complies with the requirements of para 3.1 (a) of the Pre-Action Protocol, I shall then seek advice and submit a formal response within 30 days, as required by the Protocol. Thus, I require your client to comply with its obligations by sending me the following information/documents:1. An explanation of the cause of action
2. whether they are pursuing me as driver or keeper
3. whether they are relying on the provisions of Schedule 4 of POFA 2012
4. what the details of the claim are; for how long it is claimed the vehicle was parked, how the monies being claimed arose and have been calculated
5. Is the claim for a contractual breach? If so, what is the date of the agreement? The names of the parties to it and provide to me a copy of that contract.
6. If the claim is for a contractual breach, photographs showing the vehicle was parked in contravention of said contract.
7. Is the claim for trespass? If so, provide details.
8. Provide me a copy of the contract with the landowner under which they assert authority to bring the claim, as required by the BPA/IPC Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP).
9. a plan showing where any signs were displayed
10. Photographs of the signs displayed (size of sign, size of font, height at which displayed) at the time of any alleged contravention.
11. Provide details of the original charge, and detail any interest and administrative or other charges added
12. Am I to understand that the additional £60 represents what is dressed up as a 'Debt Recovery' fee, and if so, is this nett or inclusive of VAT? If the latter, would you kindly explain why I am being asked to pay the operator’s VAT?
13. With regard to the principal alleged PCN sum: Is this damages, or will it be pleaded as consideration for parking?
I am clearly entitled to this information under paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c) of the Practice Direction. I also need it in order to comply with my own obligations under paragraph 6(b).
If your client does not provide me with this information then I put you on notice that I will be relying on the cases of Webb Resolutions Ltd v Waller Needham & Green [2012] EWHC 3529 (Ch), Daejan Investments Limited v The Park West Club Limited (Part 20) Buxton Associates [2003] EWHC 2872, Charles Church Developments Ltd v Stent Foundations Limited & Peter Dann Limited [2007] EWHC 855 in asking the court to impose sanctions on your client and to order a stay of the proceedings, pursuant to paragraphs 13, 15(b) and (c) and 16 of the Practice Direction, as referred to in paragraph 7.2 of the Protocol.
Until your client has complied with its obligations and provided this information, I am unable to respond properly to the alleged claim and to consider my position in relation to it, and it is entirely premature (and a waste of costs and court time) for your client to issue proceedings. Should your client do so, then I will seek an immediate stay pursuant to paragraph 15(b) of the Practice Direction and an order that this information is provided.
Yours faithfully
What date did you send the DRN and how did you send it? If by post, did you get a free proof of posting certificate from the post office? If by email, did you CC in yourself?
What "complaint" did you fail to send to EPS? Are you saying you failed to request a copy of the original NtK?
You now have a Letter of Claim (LoC) which means that you are going to receive an N1SDT Claim Form from the CNBC in the post after 30 days from. the date of the LoC.
If you doubt follow the advice and then come asking for further advice, why do you expect us to help you?
For now, you respond to the LoC with the following:QuoteDear Sirs,
Your Letter Before Claim dated 24th April 2025 contains insufficient detail of the claim and fails to provide copies of evidence your client places reliance upon and thus is in complete contravention of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims.
I am the registered keeper of the vehicle. I am not obliged to identify the driver and I decline to do so. As there is no legal presumption that the keeper of a vehicle was its driver on any particular occasion, your client cannot pursue me as driver as per VCS v Edward (20230) [H0KF6C9C].
I will defend any claim vigorously and seek costs in relation to your client’s unreasonable and vexatious conduct under Part 27.14(2)(g)
As your letter lacks specificity and breaches the requirements of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (paragraphs 3.1(a)-(d), 5.1 and 5.2) as well as the Practice Direction - Pre-Action Conduct (paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c)), you must treat this letter as a formal request for all of the documents/information that the protocol now requires your client to provide. Your client must not issue proceedings without complying with that protocol.
As solicitors you must surely be familiar with the requirements of both the Practice Direction and the Pre-Action Protocol for debt claims and your client, as a serial litigator of debt claims, should likewise be aware of them. As you (and your client) must know, the Practice Direction and Protocol bind all potential litigants, whatever the size or type of the claim. Its express purpose is to assist parties in understanding the claim and their respective positions in relation to it, to enable parties to take stock of their positions and to negotiate a settlement, or at least narrow the issues, without incurring the costs of court proceedings or using up valuable court time. It is embarrassing that a firm of Solicitors are sending a consumer a vague and un-evidenced 'Letter Before Claim' in complete ignorance of the pre-existing Practice Direction and the Pre-Action Protocol.
I confirm that, once I am in receipt of a Letter Before Claim that complies with the requirements of para 3.1 (a) of the Pre-Action Protocol, I shall then seek advice and submit a formal response within 30 days, as required by the Protocol. Thus, I require your client to comply with its obligations by sending me the following information/documents:1. An explanation of the cause of action
2. whether they are pursuing me as driver or keeper
3. whether they are relying on the provisions of Schedule 4 of POFA 2012
4. what the details of the claim are; for how long it is claimed the vehicle was parked, how the monies being claimed arose and have been calculated
5. Is the claim for a contractual breach? If so, what is the date of the agreement? The names of the parties to it and provide to me a copy of that contract.
6. If the claim is for a contractual breach, photographs showing the vehicle was parked in contravention of said contract.
7. Is the claim for trespass? If so, provide details.
8. Provide me a copy of the contract with the landowner under which they assert authority to bring the claim, as required by the BPA/IPC Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP).
9. a plan showing where any signs were displayed
10. Photographs of the signs displayed (size of sign, size of font, height at which displayed) at the time of any alleged contravention.
11. Provide details of the original charge, and detail any interest and administrative or other charges added
12. Am I to understand that the additional £60 represents what is dressed up as a 'Debt Recovery' fee, and if so, is this nett or inclusive of VAT? If the latter, would you kindly explain why I am being asked to pay the operator’s VAT?
13. With regard to the principal alleged PCN sum: Is this damages, or will it be pleaded as consideration for parking?
I am clearly entitled to this information under paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c) of the Practice Direction. I also need it in order to comply with my own obligations under paragraph 6(b).
If your client does not provide me with this information then I put you on notice that I will be relying on the cases of Webb Resolutions Ltd v Waller Needham & Green [2012] EWHC 3529 (Ch), Daejan Investments Limited v The Park West Club Limited (Part 20) Buxton Associates [2003] EWHC 2872, Charles Church Developments Ltd v Stent Foundations Limited & Peter Dann Limited [2007] EWHC 855 in asking the court to impose sanctions on your client and to order a stay of the proceedings, pursuant to paragraphs 13, 15(b) and (c) and 16 of the Practice Direction, as referred to in paragraph 7.2 of the Protocol.
Until your client has complied with its obligations and provided this information, I am unable to respond properly to the alleged claim and to consider my position in relation to it, and it is entirely premature (and a waste of costs and court time) for your client to issue proceedings. Should your client do so, then I will seek an immediate stay pursuant to paragraph 15(b) of the Practice Direction and an order that this information is provided.
Yours faithfully
Dear Sirs,
Your Letter Before Claim dated 24th April 2025 contains insufficient detail of the claim and fails to provide copies of evidence your client places reliance upon and thus is in complete contravention of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims.
I am the registered keeper of the vehicle. I am not obliged to identify the driver and I decline to do so. As there is no legal presumption that the keeper of a vehicle was its driver on any particular occasion, your client cannot pursue me as driver as per VCS v Edward (20230) [H0KF6C9C].
I will defend any claim vigorously and seek costs in relation to your client’s unreasonable and vexatious conduct under Part 27.14(2)(g)
As your letter lacks specificity and breaches the requirements of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (paragraphs 3.1(a)-(d), 5.1 and 5.2) as well as the Practice Direction - Pre-Action Conduct (paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c)), you must treat this letter as a formal request for all of the documents/information that the protocol now requires your client to provide. Your client must not issue proceedings without complying with that protocol.
As solicitors you must surely be familiar with the requirements of both the Practice Direction and the Pre-Action Protocol for debt claims and your client, as a serial litigator of debt claims, should likewise be aware of them. As you (and your client) must know, the Practice Direction and Protocol bind all potential litigants, whatever the size or type of the claim. Its express purpose is to assist parties in understanding the claim and their respective positions in relation to it, to enable parties to take stock of their positions and to negotiate a settlement, or at least narrow the issues, without incurring the costs of court proceedings or using up valuable court time. It is embarrassing that a firm of Solicitors are sending a consumer a vague and un-evidenced 'Letter Before Claim' in complete ignorance of the pre-existing Practice Direction and the Pre-Action Protocol.
I confirm that, once I am in receipt of a Letter Before Claim that complies with the requirements of para 3.1 (a) of the Pre-Action Protocol, I shall then seek advice and submit a formal response within 30 days, as required by the Protocol. Thus, I require your client to comply with its obligations by sending me the following information/documents:1. An explanation of the cause of action
2. whether they are pursuing me as driver or keeper
3. whether they are relying on the provisions of Schedule 4 of POFA 2012
4. what the details of the claim are; for how long it is claimed the vehicle was parked, how the monies being claimed arose and have been calculated
5. Is the claim for a contractual breach? If so, what is the date of the agreement? The names of the parties to it and provide to me a copy of that contract.
6. If the claim is for a contractual breach, photographs showing the vehicle was parked in contravention of said contract.
7. Is the claim for trespass? If so, provide details.
8. Provide me a copy of the contract with the landowner under which they assert authority to bring the claim, as required by the BPA/IPC Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP).
9. a plan showing where any signs were displayed
10. Photographs of the signs displayed (size of sign, size of font, height at which displayed) at the time of any alleged contravention.
11. Provide details of the original charge, and detail any interest and administrative or other charges added
12. Am I to understand that the additional £60 represents what is dressed up as a 'Debt Recovery' fee, and if so, is this nett or inclusive of VAT? If the latter, would you kindly explain why I am being asked to pay the operator’s VAT?
13. With regard to the principal alleged PCN sum: Is this damages, or will it be pleaded as consideration for parking?
I am clearly entitled to this information under paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c) of the Practice Direction. I also need it in order to comply with my own obligations under paragraph 6(b).
If your client does not provide me with this information then I put you on notice that I will be relying on the cases of Webb Resolutions Ltd v Waller Needham & Green [2012] EWHC 3529 (Ch), Daejan Investments Limited v The Park West Club Limited (Part 20) Buxton Associates [2003] EWHC 2872, Charles Church Developments Ltd v Stent Foundations Limited & Peter Dann Limited [2007] EWHC 855 in asking the court to impose sanctions on your client and to order a stay of the proceedings, pursuant to paragraphs 13, 15(b) and (c) and 16 of the Practice Direction, as referred to in paragraph 7.2 of the Protocol.
Until your client has complied with its obligations and provided this information, I am unable to respond properly to the alleged claim and to consider my position in relation to it, and it is entirely premature (and a waste of costs and court time) for your client to issue proceedings. Should your client do so, then I will seek an immediate stay pursuant to paragraph 15(b) of the Practice Direction and an order that this information is provided.
Yours faithfully
STOP overthinking this. Just send the DRN to the DPO. Nothing adverse other than the possibility of you getting a CCJ by default is going to happen.
Sending a DRN affects nothing else.
STOP overthinking this. Just send the DRN to the DPO. Nothing adverse other than the possibility of you getting a CCJ by default is going to happen.
Sending a DRN affects nothing else.
Can I get Euro Parking Services to update our address with them before correcting the logbook address?
Update with whom? The whole point of the DRN is get EPS to update THEIR records, not the DVLA records. That' your job. Just get the DRN sent and be done with it.
Can I get Euro Parking Services to update our address with them before correcting the logbook address?
https://change-address-v5c.service.gov.uk
If you have lost your logbook, there is an option to get a replacement, but they will charge a fee for this I believe.
https://change-address-v5c.service.gov.uk
You can safely ignore Empira. They are nothing but a powerless debt collector and cannot do anything except to try and scare the low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree into paying out of ignorance and fear.
What you cannot ignore is the fact that you most likely did not update the address on the vehicle V5C after your last change of address. Updating your drivers licence does not update any other DVLA data and you can check online if your V5C address is correct and change it if necessary. However, the issue is that EPS now hold two possible addresses for you and they cannot have a second bite at the cherry to obtain your current address.
If the V5C address is incorrect, then you need to send a Data Rectification Notice (DRN) to the DPO of EPS and instruct them to update their records with your current address for service and to erase the old address. The highlighted words are there for a reason and must be used.
If you don't so this, EPS can simply issue a court claim to the old address and you would know nothing about it until a default CCJ appears on your credit file. So, get that done as a priority.
As you have never received the original Notice to Keeper (NtK), you can send a formal complaint to EPS and request a copy of the original NtK and require them to evidence the actual date they sent the NtK.
Apart from that, there is little else you can do at this stage. Ignore all debt recovery letters. If/when you receive a Letter of Claim (LoC) come back and we can advise on how to proceed.