No, that's good. As the N279 has been signed and submitted by an unauthorised person who is not permitted to conduct litigation (signing and submitting an N279 is conducting litigation), you should now send the following email to the court and CC DCB Legal and yourself:
Subject: Request for costs order following discontinuance – Claim No. [xxxx]
Dear Sir/Madam,
I acknowledge receipt of the Claimant’s Notice of Discontinuance (N279).
The Defendant respectfully requests that this matter be placed before a District Judge for consideration of costs pursuant to CPR 27.14(2)(g), on the basis that the Claimant’s representative has behaved unreasonably in conducting the proceedings.
The Notice of Discontinuance was signed and filed by a paralegal, described as “Claimant’s solicitor” but not an authorised person under the Legal Services Act 2007. Conducting litigation, including signing or filing court documents, is a reserved legal activity under Schedule 2 paragraph 4 of the Act. The High Court in Mazur & Anor v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) reaffirmed that an unauthorised person may not conduct litigation even under supervision.
In view of this breach, and the inconvenience and time caused to the Defendant in preparing and responding to these proceedings, the Defendant seeks modest costs for time spent as a litigant in person at £24/hour, together with minor disbursements, as detailed in the attached schedule.
The Defendant invites the Court to summarily assess the costs on the papers and order payment within 14 days.
Yours faithfully,
[Your name]
Defendant
Encl: Schedule of costs (Litigant in Person rate £24/hour)
Attach the following costs schedule to the email:
Defendant’s Costs Schedule (Litigant in Person)
Claim No.: [XXXX]
Parties: [Claimant] v [Defendant]
Basis sought: CPR 27.14(2)(g) – unreasonable conduct (unauthorised conduct of litigation; Mazur; LSA 2007)
Rate: Litigant in person rate £24/hour (PD 46 ¶3.4)
Time claimed (total 5.0 hours):
Considering claim form/PoC and papers – 1.0 h → £24.00
Researching law/procedure (small-claims costs; PoFA/CPR; LSA/Mazur) – 1.5 h → £36.00
Drafting and finalising Defence – 1.5 h → £36.00
Completing and filing DQ (N180) and correspondence – 0.7 h → £16.80
Mediation call attendance and follow-up – 0.3 h → £7.20
Subtotal (5.0 h × £24): £120.00
Disbursements: none (all steps online) – £0.00
Total sought: £120.00
I respectfully invite summary assessment on the papers and an order for payment within 14 days.
Signed: [type your full name]
Dated: [date]
Name: [Your full name], Defendant
You do not negotiate with DCB Legal. Refuse any offers to settle. They will eventually discontinue if the claim isn't struck out first.
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.
These "leaving the site" cases are known as "toothbrush claims" because the last time, many years ago, that someone tried to make a claim like this, the judge was so incensed with the claimants representative due to the absurdity and lack of evidence that he held him in contempt of court and threatened the rep that the next time he tried to bring such a case before him, he'd better bring a toothbrush as he'd be spending some time in custody for contempt.
What evidence has TPS provided to back up their claim? Anyway, easy to deal with...
With an issue date of 22nd April you have until 4pm on Monday 12th May to submit your defence. If you submit an Acknowledgement of Service (AoS) before then, you would then have until 4pm on Tuesday 27th May to submit 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
Otherwise, here is the defence and link to the draft order that goes with it. You only need to edit your name and the claim number. You sign the defence by typing your full name for the signature and date it. There is nothing to edit in the draft order.
When you're ready you combine both documents as a single PDF attachment and send as an attachment in an email to claimresponses.cnbc@justice.gov.uk and CC in yourself. The claim number must be in the email subject field and in the body of the email just put: "Please find attached the defence and draft order in the matter of [claimant] v [your full name] Claim no.: [claim number]."
IN THE COUNTY COURT
Claim No: [Claim Number]
BETWEEN:
[Claimant]
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. In any event, the allegation that a driver 'left the site' while a vehicle remained parked does not, of itself, constitute a breach of contract. No contractual term is pleaded, nor is its incorporation or enforceability explained. The claim is speculative, incoherent, and discloses no reasonable cause of action.
5. 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.
6. 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:
Draft Order for the defence (https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/tcewefk7daozuje25chkl/Strikeout-order-v2.pdf?rlkey=wxnymo8mwcma2jj8xihjm7pdx&st=nbtf0cn6&dl=0)