Free Traffic Legal Advice

Live cases legal advice => Private parking tickets => Topic started by: dave-o on June 02, 2025, 11:07:38 am

Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: dave-o on January 13, 2026, 09:07:18 pm
Sorry for the delay.  Here is the Notice of Discontinuance.

(https://i.ibb.co/SYzvg5S/711200016594-N279-Notice-Of-Discontinuance-181225122531.jpg)
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: b789 on December 18, 2025, 03:21:29 pm
Yes please. We need to see the N279 NoD for our records. Please not redact the name of the person who signed it.
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: dave-o on December 18, 2025, 02:57:27 pm
Just to say I have just received a "notice of Discontinuance".  Yay!

Thanks for the help! Justice is done!

Happy to attach the doc if that would be useful as an example for others...
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: dave-o on December 18, 2025, 10:02:23 am
Nothing received today.  @b789, what would you recommend from here? You suggested we should file something on the 18th if nothing received from the claimant?

Many thanks
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: jfollows on December 17, 2025, 01:04:56 pm
Reply #24:
Quote
MCOL will update to show any action until the claim is transferred to the defendants local county court. After that, it plays no part in the process.
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: dave-o on December 17, 2025, 12:46:39 pm
Hi

Just to confirm I haven't received anything yet, either by post or email.  This case still does not show up in MCOL.

I know you said the 18th so I'll check back in tomorrow to conform I still haven't received anything.

Thanks
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: b789 on December 02, 2025, 05:06:30 pm
If you've not received a copy of their Witness Statement by 18th December, remind me here to prepare a suitable WS for you to submit on the 19th.
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: dave-o on December 02, 2025, 05:00:31 pm
Thank you all.  Just for the avoidance of all doubt, do I need to enter anything else by the 19th, or the particulars (as provided here) I have already submitted will be enough?

Presumably they will fold regardless of any extra submissions, but just to check it's not a formality or something.
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: AndyT008 on December 01, 2025, 02:05:55 pm
b789 - wow! - thank you for your reply to my questions - that is very helpful.
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: b789 on December 01, 2025, 01:34:13 pm
You’re not imagining it – those dates are unhelpful and front-load all the work onto you, while DCB Legal still haven’t even committed to paying the trial fee.

1. What the court has effectively said

– The PoC say no more than “vehicle parked without a valid pay by phone transaction” plus the usual boilerplate.
– Your defence is: these PoC are still too bare to meet CPR 16.4 and you invited strike-out.
– The procedural judge has chosen not to strike the claim or your defence. So the 16.4 point is preserved, but it’s now for the trial judge to decide, not a done deal.

Separately, the court has ordered witness statements by 19 December 2025. That is a binding direction on both sides unless it is varied.

2. The defence is all about CPR 16.4

A defence is a pleading. It explains why, at the pleadings stage, you could not properly answer a vague claim.

A witness statement is evidence. You are allowed to say:

– At the time I filed my defence, the PoC were too bare for me to plead fully.
– I maintain that they still fail CPR 16.4 and that the claim should be struck out.
– However, in compliance with the court’s later order to file a witness statement, I set out below the limited facts I can give, without waiving my criticisms of the PoC.

That lets you give the four key facts:

– Site is an abandoned industrial estate, businesses closed.
– Terms require the driver to be a “customer” of a non-existent business, so compliance is impossible.
– There is a gate that is always left open, so this is obviously a trap, not genuine control.
– The vehicle was only on site for 11 minutes.

You can then argue, in the alternative, that even if the judge finds the PoC just about adequate, on those facts there is either no contract, or no breach, or the charge is plainly an unfair penalty. That does not contradict the defence. It shows you did not have enough pleaded information then, but you are now complying with the court’s later order and giving the judge what little factual background you can.

3. Your specific dilemma: file on 19 December if ECP/DCB have done nothing?

Yes. Even if they have not served any WS by that date, You should still serve a short, tightly-focused WS on the deadline. Waiting to see if they pay the trial fee or serve a WS is too risky, for three reasons:

a) You would be in clear breach of a court order.
If ECP pay the fee and eventually serve a WS, they can point to your non-compliance. You could be looking at needing relief from sanctions just to rely on your own evidence. That is wholly avoidable.

b) Judges are often more forgiving of late claimant evidence than of a LiP who ignored directions.
You do not want to hand ECP/DCB an easy procedural point while relying on the court’s indulgence for yourself.

c) If you serve nothing, and they serve something (even late), the judge has only their factual account.
Your 16.4 argument may or may not land. If it doesn’t, you will have zero evidence on the merits to oppose their narrative.

4. The “judge might say you knew enough”

That risk exists whether or not you file a WS. The judge can already see from:

– The PoC: “no valid pay by phone transaction”; and
– The fact you’ve defended at all,

that you have some idea what incident this is about.

Your best protection is not to refuse to give evidence. It is to make the structure of your WS absolutely clear:

– Primary: the PoC never gave you the basic particulars that CPR 16.4 requires (time, date, signage relied on, contractual terms, how the sum is calculated, whether they sue you as driver or keeper, etc). Re-explain that, with the PoC exhibited.
– Prejudice: explain that as a LiP you were put in an impossible position at the pleadings stage, forced to defend in the dark, and that the court should not reward ECP for using vague, generic PoC.
– Alternative: only then, “for the avoidance of doubt”, set out the four factual points you know and why, even on those limited facts, there is no enforceable claim.

If the judge decides “this claim just about passes CPR 16.4”, you have at least given yourself a merits defence. If you serve nothing, you lose both procedurally and on the facts.

5. How to use ECP/DCB behaviour and the timetable

You are absolutely right that the timetable is lopsided: you must do the WS work before ECP have paid the fee, in a claim type where ECP/DCB Legal notoriously discontinue very late. So say so, in clear terms in the WS:

– You are a LiP in a low-value parking claim.
– You have been forced to prepare a WS months before trial and before the claimant has even shown they intend to proceed by paying the trial fee.
– In this ECP/DCB Legal model of bulk litigation, almost all claims are discontinued late if defended, so this is disproportionate and abusive.
– Invite the court to take that conduct into account, especially if they do discontinue late.

That way, if they do drag you through all this and then drop it, you have at least laid the groundwork to argue unreasonable conduct and seek your costs.

6. Bottom line

Given that:

– The court has not struck the claim out.
– There is a clear order requiring WS by 19 December 2025.
– ECP/DCB Legal may or may not pay the fee.

The safest and most sensible course is:

– On 19 December, serve a short, focused WS even if ECP/DCB Legal have served nothing.
– Make it primarily about CPR 16.4 non-compliance and prejudice, with your four key factual points clearly framed as an alternative.
– Keep full proof of service.

Only if the court itself vacates the directions or strikes out the claim before that date would it be sensible not to bother. Anything else (waiting to see if they pay, waiting for their WS first) hands control back to ECP/DCB Legal and exposes you to avoidable procedural risk.

So, if you have not received their WS a few days before the deadline, remind me here and I can put something together that you can use as your WS, unless you fancy preparing it yourself and showing us before submitting it at the deadline.
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: AndyT008 on December 01, 2025, 10:05:02 am
Hello

Hello helpful people - an observation, and a couple of questions, about the timeline to the trial date for this case.

OBSERVATION
The trial date is 25 February 2026.
The trial fee payment deadline is 28 January 2026.
The deadline for the Witness Statements is given as 4pm on 19 December 2025.

QUESTION
Is it normal to have the WS date so early? - six weeks before the trial fee deadline.
Do you think the claimant will file their WS that early? - or will they deliberately miss the date so they have the defendant's WS first.

I would appreciate your view on those questions - thanks.

Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: b789 on December 01, 2025, 08:52:53 am
just to be clear you entered your defence via email to the court. I don't think when doing it this way you see anything on your mcol account. but I might be wrong.

The MCOL history will be updated to show the date the defence was received and submitted, whether sent snail mail, email or directly through MCOL.

MCOL will update to show any action until the claim is transferred to the defendants local county court. After that, it plays no part in the process.
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: Sel1700 on November 30, 2025, 06:43:10 pm
just to be clear you entered your defence via email to the court. I don't think when doing it this way you see anything on your mcol account. but I might be wrong.
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: dave-o on November 30, 2025, 05:03:36 pm

The 2nd page of that notice should specify a date by which witness statements must be submitted (if not discontinued by then). Does it and if so what is the date for that?

4pm on the 19th of December. Is there more i should submit then?
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: b789 on November 26, 2025, 07:43:39 am
No idea wh you redacted the 4pm and 10am times on that notice. They are public domain and have no significance to any privacy issues.

The crucial date is the £27 trial fee deadline, as it is just before this date that they will issue the N279 Notice of Discontinuance. Please show that to us when it arrives and leave the signature and their position unredacted.
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: DWMB2 on November 25, 2025, 07:57:27 pm
If they attempt to call you, ignore them and block their number.

The 2nd page of that notice should specify a date by which witness statements must be submitted (if not discontinued by then). Does it and if so what is the date for that?
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: dave-o on November 25, 2025, 07:54:25 pm
Evening folks.

The telephone hearing took place a few weeks ago, at which i of course did not offer to pay anything.

I have now received this:

(https://i.ibb.co/QvZNzrJs/ECPClaim.jpg) (https://ibb.co/Xx9sNSWm)

Seems pretty obvious, but just for the sake of a complete thread, I believe that i should expect a call from DCB over the next few weeks, to which I refuse to pay anything.  They may try again for a smaller amount and then they will fail to pay the fee and be struck out.

Correct?  Thanks
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: dave-o on August 06, 2025, 10:45:01 am
Thank you, this has been submitted as advised.
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: jfollows on August 06, 2025, 10:18:38 am
Do you have to fill in the mediation section (E)?  I don't want to mediate with them, but perhaps I have to be seen as willing?  Your guide doesn't mention this.  Not a criticism, just an explanation as to why I am checking this.
Yes.
No longer optional.
When it happens you offer £0, your offer will be declined, end.
Search the forum for many many examples.
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: dave-o on August 06, 2025, 10:06:18 am
Do you have to fill in the mediation section (E)?  I don't want to mediate with them, but perhaps I have to be seen as willing?  Your guide doesn't mention this.  Not a criticism, just an explanation as to why I am checking this.
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: dave-o on July 22, 2025, 05:27:53 pm
Thanks again, I appreciate your help.
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: b789 on July 21, 2025, 06:05:08 pm
Yes, you will eventually receive a letter from HMCTS with the N180 DQ forms that you are required to complete and submit to the court and a copy to the claimant. However, you can simply preempt it by downloading your own N180,  completing it on your computer and emailing it without having to print anything off.
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: dave-o on July 21, 2025, 04:22:53 pm
I can log on to MCOL fine, and I can see the one I won last year.  But there is no reference to this new one.

Sorry to keep labouring the point, but surely the court will contact me to let me know more documents are required?  They can't just expect people to check MCOL?
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: b789 on July 21, 2025, 02:54:38 pm
I have no idea why your MCOL is not showing your claim. Your defence has obviously been submitted and a copy served on the claimant. You access your MCOL through your Government Gateway. Use whatever email address you used to set up your Gateway and then use the MCOL password given in the claim form.

If you have no luck, just download your won N180DQ and follow the instructions already provided.
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: dave-o on July 21, 2025, 02:47:15 pm
This claim does not show in MCOL at all, should it at this stage?.  I believe the account was set up under an old email address though, not the one I used to send the defence in.  Will MCOL be using my name and address to identify me or my email?  I'm just wondering if I need to set up another MCOL account using my new email address.
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: b789 on July 21, 2025, 02:18:15 pm
Just check your MCOL history. When it updates to say that your DQ has been sent, just follow the instructions given above.

The Claimant is not telling the defendant what to do. All you have received is a copy of their DQ. File it or use it as kindling. No one cares. Just as when you file yours, you are obliged to copy in the claimant or their legal representative.
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: dave-o on July 21, 2025, 01:59:04 pm
Presumably the court will contact me to ask for this though right?

Surely the onus can't be on the claimant to tell the defendant what to do?
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: jfollows on July 21, 2025, 12:28:47 pm
You send in your own N180 in due course, and your choices in that trump theirs. You do it online downloading a blank form.

Quote
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: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: dave-o on July 21, 2025, 12:25:31 pm
I've just received a package from DCB containing:

- A letter stating that their client intends to proceed
- A pre-filled N180 that they want me to fill in.  They have checked "suitable for remote hearing" and "hear in claimant's home court"

Just to check that, as I believe, this is a fiendish attempt to get me to remove my right to a personal hearing in my own court.

I believe I should ignore this and wait for something from the actual court?

Thanks
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: dave-o on June 05, 2025, 09:34:53 am
Thanks, the defence has been submitted as advised.
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: b789 on June 04, 2025, 03:39:34 pm
Yes
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: dave-o on June 04, 2025, 02:18:37 pm
Thanks for your help once again.  Just to be 100% sure, for the second option, when you say "combine both documents" you mean the (personalised) document above starting "IN THE COUNTY COURT" and the linked Draft Order for Defence, is that right?

Much appreciated!
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: b789 on June 03, 2025, 01:01:43 am
With an issue date of 28th May, you have until 4pm on Monday 16th June to submit your defence. If you submit an Acknowledgement of Service (AoS) before then, you would then have until 4pm on Monday 30th June 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 Euro Car Parks Ltd v [your full name] Claim no.: [claim number]."

Quote
IN THE COUNTY COURT
Claim No: [Claim Number]

BETWEEN:

Euro Car Parks 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:

Draft Order for the defence (https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/tcewefk7daozuje25chkl/Strikeout-order-v2.pdf?rlkey=wxnymo8mwcma2jj8xihjm7pdx&st=nbtf0cn6&dl=0)
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: dave-o on June 02, 2025, 04:30:39 pm
This was two years ago, so I am not sure I have it.  Is this strictly necessary at this point?  Presumably they will have to submit it in their evidence bundle.  Thanks
Title: Re: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: jfollows on June 02, 2025, 11:29:24 am
The original PCN?
Title: ECP / DCB Court Claim - Advice Appreciated
Post by: dave-o on June 02, 2025, 11:07:38 am
As I fought another DCB clam last year, I'm aware that if the correct process is followed then they will pull out shortly before their court fee becomes payable.  With this in mind, I am keen to make sure I do everything correctly from the start.

A few things to mention:
- This was in an abandoned industrial estate with all the businesses closed for some months
- As such there was no possible way a person could park in accordance with the Ts&Cs as those require the user to be a customer of one of the businesses
- There was a gate that would have prevented entry, however this is always left open (my point being that if they truly wanted to stop people parking there, they could have just closed off the car park.  Clearly a money making "scheme")
- The car was inside the car park for a total for 11 minutes

Now for the paperwork:

(https://i.ibb.co/VWKmxRGs/1.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/JW9qMc6s/2.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/cKpzBC96/3.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/3ms2RFnS/5.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/67f98TG5/6.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/Z7Zgh2k/7.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/s9228RBr/8.jpg)

- I believe all I need to do at this point is acknowledge service?
- I do have a MCOL account
- What will be the next date when action is needed, or will this become clear later?


Thanks for your help.